Anhang: Ergänzende und vertiefende Materialien


Die drawidische Anti-Brahmanen/Anti-Sanskrit-Bewegung

Gastvortrag an der Universität Würzburg am 2021-11-30


Alois Payer


Payer, Alois <1944 - >: Anhang: Ergänzende und vertiefende Materialien zu: Die drawidische Anti-Brahmanen/Anti-Sanskrit-Bewegung. -- URL: 

Anhang zu: Payer, Alois <1944 - >: Die drawidische Anti-Brahmanen/Anti-Sanskrit-Bewegung. -- URL:

Erstveröffentlichung: 2021-12-01


Copyright: Creative Commons Lizenz - Verfasserangabe - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen (CC-BY-SA 3.0)

Diese Materialsammlung ist gedacht als Reader zum genannten Gastvortrag.


Es erscheint:

Philip Sclater (1829 - 1913): The Mammals of Madagascar. -- In: Quarterly Journal of Science, vol. 1, April 1864. -- S. 213 - 219. -- Online: The quarterly journal of science : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive


By P. L. Sclater, M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S.. Secretary of the Zoological Society of London.

Organic beings are not scattered broadcast over the earth's surface without regularity or arrangement, as the casual observer might suppose, nor are they distributed according to the variations of climate or of any other physical external agent, although the latter have, unquestionably, much influence in modifying their forms. But each species (or assemblage of similar individuals), whether of the animal or vegetable kingdom, is found to occupy a certain definite and continuous geographical area on the earth. In like manner, each genus, or assemblage of species, each family, or assemblage of genera, and each order, or assemblage of families, may be said to be subject to similar laws, as regards its geographical distribution,—although, as might have been supposed, the areas occupied by the higher groups are usually larger, and in some eases co-extensive with the earth's surface.

It thus happens that the various parts of the world are characterized by possessing special groups of animals and vegetables, and that, as a general rule, such tracts of land as are most nearly contiguous have their Faunae and Florae most nearly resembling one another: while, vice versa, those that are farthest asunder are inhabited by most different forms of animal and vegetable life. When any exception to this rule occurs, and two adjacent lands possess dissimilar forms, or two regions far apart exhibit similar forms, it is the task of the student of geographical distribution to give some reason why this has come about, and so to make the “exception prove the rule.”

In the present paper I propose to devote a short space to the examination of one of the best known and strangest of these anomalies in geographical distribution—namely, that presented to us by the Fauna of the Island of Madagascar. Madagascar being immediately contiguous to the eastern coast of Africa, and separated from it by a channel in one place only some 200 miles across, in which, moreover, there are several intermediate islands, while it is very far removed from India and America, ought, according to generally-received rules, to exhibit a Fauna of a purely African type. But this, as is well known to naturalists, is not the case. The numerous Mammals of the orders Ruminantia [Wiederkäuer], Pachydermata [Dickhäuter], and Proboscides [Rüsseltiere], so characteristic of the Aethiopian Fauna, are entirely absent from Madagascar. The same is the case with the larger species of Carnivora [Raubtiere], which are found throughout the African continent, but do not extend into Madagascar. Again, the highly-organized types of Quadrumana, which prevail in the forests of the mainland, are utterly wanting in the neighbouring island, their place lining there occupied by several genera of the inferior family of Lemurs. In the like manner, I shall lie able to show that similar irregularities prevail to a greater or lesser extent in every other part of the series of Mammals, and that, in short, the anomalies presented to us by the forms of life prevalent in this island arc so striking, that claims have been put forward in its favour to be considered as a distinct primary geographical region of the earth.

[Es folgen die Belege für die aufgestellten Behauptungen]

The following deductions may, perhaps, be arrived at from what we have before us :—

  1. Madagascar has never been connected with Africa, as it at present exists. This would seem probable from the absence of certain all-pervading Aethiopian types in Madagascar, such as Antilope, Hippopotamus, Felis, &c. But, on the other hand, the presence of Lemurs in Africa renders it certain that Africa, as it at present exists, contains land that once formed part of Madagascar.
  2. Madagascar and the Mascarene Islands (which are universally acknowledged to belong to the same category) must have remained for a long epoch separated from every other part of the globe, in order to have acquired the many peculiarities now exhibited in their Mammal fauna e.g. Lemur, Chiromys [Fingertier], Eupleres [Madagassische Raubtiere], Centetes [Tenrek], &c.—to be elaborated by the gradual modification of pre-existing forms.
  3. Some land-connection must have existed in former ages between Madagascar and India, whereon the original stock, whence the present Lemuridae of Africa, Madagascar, and India are descended, flourished.
  4. It must bo likewise allowed that some sort of connection must also have existed between Madagascar and land which now forms part of the New World in order to permit the derivation of the Centetinae from a common stock with the Solendon [Schlitzrüssler], account for the fact that the Lemuridae, as a body, are  certainly more nearly allied to the weaker forms of American monkeys than to any of the Simiidae [Affen] of the Old World.

To conclude, therefore, granted the hypothesis of the derivative origin of species, the anomalies of the Mammal fauna of Madagascar can best be explained by supposing that, anterior to the existence of Africa in its present shape, a large continent occupied parts of the Atlantic and Indian Ocean stretching out towards (what is now) America on the west, and to India and its islands on the east ; that this continent was broken up into islands, of which some became amalgamated with the present continent of Africa, and some possibly with what is now Asia—and that in Madagascar and the Mascarene Islands we have existing relics of this great continent, for which as the original focus of the “ Stirps Lemurum,'' I should propose the name Lemuria !"

[a.a.O., S. 213f. ; 218f.]


Berlin: Es erscheint:

Ernst Haeckel (1834 - 1919): Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte : Gemeinverständliche wissenschaftliche Vorträge über die Entwickelungslehre im Allgemeinen und diejenige von Darwin, Goethe und Lamarck im Besonderen. -- 2., verm. Auf. -- Berlin : Weimar, 1870

1873 erscheint eine englische Übersetzung unter dem Titel:

Ernst Haeckel (1834 - 1919): : The history of creation : or the development of the earth and its inhabitants by the action of natural causes: a popular exposition of the doctrine of evolution in general and of that of Darwin, Goethe and Lamarck in particular. -- New York : Aplleton, 1873

In der englischen Übersetzung von 1880 wird die Karte "Hypothetical sketch of the monophyletic origin and the extension of the 12 races of man from Lemuria over the earth" so erklärt:

"Plate XV. (After page 369, Vol. II.)

Hypothetical Sketch of the Monophyletic Origin and the Diffusion of the Twelve Species of Men from Lemuria over the earth.

The hypothesis here geographically sketched of course only claims an entirely provisional value, as in the present imperfect state of our anthropological knowledge it is simply intended to show how the distribution of the human species, from a single primaeval home, may be approximately indicated. The probable primaeval home, or “ Paradise,” is here assumed to be Lemuria, a tropical continent at present lying below the level of the Indian Ocean, the former existence of which in the tertiary period seems very probable from numerous facts in animal and vegetable geography. (Compare vol. i. p. 361, and vol. ii. p. 315.) But it is also very possible that the hypothetical “ cradle of the human race ” lay further to the east (in Hindostan or Further India), or further to the west (in eastern Africa). Future investigations, especially in comparative anthropology and palaeontology, will, it is to be hoped, enable us to determine the probable position of the primaeval home of man more definitely than it is possible to do at present.

If in opposition to our monophyletic hypothesis, the polyphyletic hypothesis—which maintains the origin of the different human species from several different species of anthropoid ape—be preferred and adopted, then, from among the many possible hypotheses which arise, the one deserving most confidence seems to be that which assumes a double pithecoid root for the human race namely, an Asiatic and an African root. For it is a very remarkable fact, that the African man-like apes (gorilla and chimpanzee) are characterized by a distinctly long-headed, or. dolichocephalous, form of skull, like the human species peculiar to Africa (Hottentots, Caffres, Negroes, Nubians). On the other hand, the Asiatic man-like apes (especially the small and large orang), by their distinct, short-headed, or brachycephalous, form of skull agree with human species especially characteristic of Asia (Mongols and Malays). Hence, one might be tempted to derive the latter (the Asiatic man-like apes and primaeval men) from a common form of brachycephalous ape, and the former (the African man-like apes and primeeval men) from a common dolichocephalous form of ape.

In any case, tropical Africa and southern Asia (and between them Lemuria, which formerly connected them) are those portions of the earth which deserve the first consideration in the discussion as to the primaeval home of the human race; America and Australia are, on the other hand, entirely excluded from it. Even Europe (which is in fact but a western peninsula of Asia) is scarcely of any importance in regard to the “ Paradise question.”

It is self-evident that the migrations of the different human species from their primaeval home, and their geographical distribution, could on our Plate XV. be indicated only in a very general way, and in the roughest lines. The numerous migrations of the many branches and tribes in all directions, as well as the very important re-migrations, had to be entirely disregarded. In order to make these latter in some degree clear, our knowledge would, in the first place, need to be much more complete, and secondly, we should have to make use of an atlas with a number of plates showing the various migrations. Our Plate XV. claims no more than to indicate, in a very general way, the approximate geographical dispersion of the twelve human species as it existed in the fifteenth century (before the general diffusion of the Indo-Germanic race), and as it can be sketched out approximately, so as to harmonize with our hypothesis of descent. The geographical barriers to diffusion (mountains, deserts, rivers, straits, etc.), have not been taken into consideration in this general sketch of migration, because, in earlier periods of the earth’s history, they were quite different in size and form from what they arc to-day. The gradual transmutation of catarrhine apes into pithecoid men probably took place in the tertiary period in the hypothetical Lemuria, and the boundaries and forms of the present continents and oceans must then have been completely different from what they are now. Moreover, the mighty influence of the ice period is of great importance in the question of the migration and diffusion of the human species, although it as yet cannot be more accurately defined in detail. I here, therefore, as in my other hypotheses of development, expressly guard myself against any dogmatic interpretation; they arc nothing but first attempts."

[Quelle: The history of creation, or, The development of the earth and its inhabitants by the action of natural causes : a popular exposition of the doctrine of evolution in general, and of that of Darwin, Goethe and Lamarck in particular : Haeckel, Ernst Heinrich Philipp August, 1834-1919 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- S. 399ff.]

Haeckels Ausführungen zu Lemuria lauten in der englischen Übersetzung von 1880 so:

"In now turning to the equally interesting and difficult question of the relative connection, migration, and primaeval home of the twelve species of men, I must premise the remark that, in the present state of our anthropological knowledge, any answer to this question must be regarded only as a provisional hypothesis. This is much the same as with any genealogical hypothesis which we may form of the origin of kindred animal and vegetable species, on the basis of the “Natural System.” But the necessary uncertainty of these special hypotheses of descent, in no way shakes the absolute certainty of the general theory of descent. Man, we may feel certain, is descended from Catarrhini, or narrow-nosed apes, whether we agree with the polyphylites, and suppose each human species, in its primaeval home, to have originated out of a special kind of ape; or whether, agreeing with the monophylites, we suppose that all the human species arose only by differentiation from a single species of primaeval man (Homo primigenius).

For many and weighty reasons we hold the monophyletic hypothesis to be the more correct, and we therefore assume a single primaeval home for mankind, where he developed out of a long since extinct anthropoid species of ape. Of the five now existing continents, neither Australia, nor America, nor Europe can have been this primaeval home, or the so-called “Paradise,” the “cradle of the human race.”

Most circumstances indicate southern Asia as the locality in question. Besides southern Asia, the only other of the now existing continents which might be viewed in this light is Africa. But there are a number of circumstances (especially chorological facts) which suggest that the primaeval home of man was a continent now sunk below the surface of the Indian Ocean, which extended along the south of Asia, as it is at present (and probably in direct connection with it), towards the cast, as far as further India and the Sunda Islands; towards the west, as far as Madagascar and the south-eastern shores of Africa. We have already mentioned that many facts in animal and vegetable geography render the former existence of such a south Indian continent very probable. (Compare vol. i. p. 361.) Sclater has given this continent the name of Lemuria, from the Semi-apes which were characteristic of it. By assuming this Lemuria to have been man’s primaeval home, we greatly facilitate the explanation of the geographical distribution of the human species by migration. (Compare the Table of Migrations XV., and its explanation at the end.)

We as yet know of no fossil remains of the hypothetical primaeval man (Homo primigenius) who developed out of anthropoid apes during the tertiary period, either in Lemuria or in southern Asia, or possibly in Africa. But considering the extraordinary resemblance between the lowest woolly-haired men, and the highest man-like apes, which still exist at the present day, it requires but a slight stretch of the imagination to conceive an intermediate form connecting the two, and to see in it an approximate likeness to the supposed primaeval men, or ape-like men. The form of their skull was probably very long, with slanting teeth; their hair woolly; the colour of their skin dark, of a brownish tint The hair covering the whole body was probably thicker than in any of the still living human species; their arms comparatively longer and stronger; their legs, on the other hand, knock-kneed, shorter and thinner, with entirely undeveloped calves; their walk but half erect.

This ape-like man very probably did not as yet possess an actual human language, that is, an articulate language of ideas. Human speech, as has already been remarked, most likely originated after the divergence of the primaeval species of men into different species. The number of primaeval languages is, however, considerably larger than the number of the species of men above discussed. For philologists have hitherto not been able to trace the four primaeval languages of the Mediterranean species, namely, the Basque, Caucasian, Semitic, and Indo-Germanic to a single primaeval language. As little can the different Negro languages be derived from a common primaeval language; hence both these species, Mediterranean and Negro, are certainly polyglottonic, that is, their respective languages originated after the divergence of the speechless primary species into several races had already taken place. Perhaps the Mongols, the Arctic and American tribes, are likewise polyglottonic. The Malayan species is, however, mono-glottonic; all the Polynesian and Sundanesian dialects and languages can be derived from a common, long since extinct primaeval language, which is not related to any other language on earth. All the other human species, Nubians, Dravidas, Australians, Papuans, Hottentots, and Kaffres are likewise monoglottonic. (Compare p. 333.)

Out of speechless primaeval man, whom we consider as the common primary species of all the others, there developed in the first place—probably by natural selection— various species of men unknown to us, and now long since extinct, and who still remained at the stage of speechless ape-men (Alalus, or Pithecanthropus). Two of these species, a woolly-haired and a straight-haired, which were most strongly divergent, and consequently overpowered the others in the struggle for life, became the primary forms of the other remaining human species.

The main branch of woolly-haired men (Ulotrichi) at first spread only over the southern hemisphere, and then emigrated partly eastwards, partly westwards. Remnants of the eastern branch are the Papuans in New Guinea and Melanesia, who in earlier times were diffused much further west (in further India and Sundanesia), and it was not until a late period that they were driven eastwards by the Malays. The Hottentots are the but little changed remnants of the western branch; they immigrated to their present home from the north-east. It was perhaps during this migration that the two nearly related species of Caffres and Negroes branched off from them; but it may be that they owe their origin to a peculiar branch of ape-like men.

The second main branch of primaeval straight-haired men (Lissotrichi), which is more capable of development, has probably left a but little changed remnant of its common primary form—which migrated to the south-east—in the ape-like natives of Australia. Probably very closely related to these latter are the South Asiatic primaeval Malays, or Promalays, which name we have previously given to the extinct, hypothetical primary form of the other six human species. Out of this unknown common primary form there seem to have arisen three diverging branches, namely, the true Malays, the Mongols, and the Euplocomi; the first spread to the east, the second to the north, and the third westwards.

The primaeval home, or the “ Centre of Creation,” of the Malays must be looked for in the south-eastern part of the Asiatic continent, or possibly in the more extensive continent which existed at the time when further India was directly connected with the Sunda Archipelago and eastern Lemuria. From thence the Malays spread towards the south-east, over the Sunda Archipelago as far as Borneo, then wandered, driving the Papuans before them, eastwards towards the Samoa and Tonga Islands, and thence gradually diffused over the whole of the islands of the southern Pacific, to the Sandwich Islands in the north, the Mangareva in the east, and New Zealand in the south. A single branch of the Malayan tribe was driven far westwards and peopled Madagascar.

The second main branch of primaeval Malays, that is, the Mongols, at first also spread in Southern Asia, and, radiating to the east, north, and north-west, gradually peopled the greater part of the Asiatic continent. Of the four principal races of the Mongol species, the Indo-Chinese must perhaps be looked upon as the primary group, out of which at a later period the other Coreo-Japanese and Ural-Altaian races developed as diverging branches. The Mongols migrated in many ways from western Asia into Europe, where the species is still represented in northern Russia and Scandinavia by the Fins and Lapps, in Hungary by the kindred Magyars, and in Turkey by the Osmanlis.

On the other hand, a branch of the Mongols migrated from north-eastern Asia to America, which was probably in earlier times connected with the former continent by a broad isthmus. The Arctic tribes, or Polar men, the Hyperboreans of north-eastern Asia, and the Esquimaux [Eskimos] of the extreme north of America, must probably be regarded as an offshoot of this branch, which became peculiarly degenerated by unfavourable conditions of existence. The principal portion of the Mongolian immigrants, however, migrated to the south, and gradually spread over the whole of America, first over the north, later over South America.

The third and most important main branch of primaeval Malays, the curly-haired races, or Euplocomi, have probably left in the Dravidas of Hindostan and Ceylon, that species of man which differs least from the common primary form of the Euplocomi. The principal portion of the latter, namely, the Mediterranean species, migrated from their primaeval home (Hindostan ?) westwards, and peopled the shores of the Mediterranean, south-western Asia, north Africa, and Europe. The Nubians, in the north-east of Africa, must perhaps be regarded as an offshoot of the primaeval Semitic tribes, who migrated far across central Africa almost to the western shores. The various branches of the Indo-Germanic race have deviated furthest from the common primary form of ape-like men. During classic antiquity and the middle ages, the Romanic branch (the Graeco-Italo-Keltic group), one of the two main branches of the Indo-Germanic species, outstripped all other branches in the career of civilization, but at present the same position is occupied by the Germanic. Its chief representatives are the English and Germans, who are in the present age laying the foundation for a new period of higher mental development, in the recognition and completion of the theory of descent. The recognition of the theory of development and the monistic philosophy based upon it, forms the best criterion for the degree of man’s mental development."

[Quelle: The history of creation, or, The development of the earth and its inhabitants by the action of natural causes : a popular exposition of the doctrine of evolution in general, and of that of Darwin, Goethe and Lamarck in particular : Haeckel, Ernst Heinrich Philipp August, 1834-1919 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- S. 325 - 332]

1872-12-21  - 1876-05-24

Challenger-Expedition erforscht den Meeresboden (allerdings nicht im Indischen Ozean). Das gibt allen Spekulationen über versunkene Kontinente (Atlantis, Lemuria) Auftrieb


London: Es erscheint:

Robert_Caldwell (1814 - 1891): A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages. -- 2nd ed., revised and enlarged. -- London : Trübner, 1875. -- 608 S. -- Online: A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages : Caldwell, Robert : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"In preparing the second edition of this book, as in preparing the first, I have endeavoured to give European scholars, whether resident in Europe or in India, such information respecting the Dravidian languages as might be likely to be interesting to them. I have thought more, however, of the requirements of the natives of the country, than of those of foreigners. It has been my earnest and constant desire to stimulate the natives of the districts in which the Dravidian languages are spoken to take an intelligent interest in the comparative study of their own languages; and I trust it will be found that this object has in some measure been helped forward. Educated Tamilians have studied Tamil—educated Telugus have studied Telugu—the educated classes in each language-district have studied the language and literature of that district—with an earnestness and assiduity which are highly creditable to them, and which have never been exceeded in the history of any of the languages of the world—except, perhaps, by the earnestness and assiduity with which Sanskrit has been studied by the Brahmans. One result of this long-continued devotion to grammatical studies has been the development of much intellectual acuteness; another result has been the progressive refinement of the languages themselves; and these results have acted and reacted one upon another. Hence, it is impossible for any European who has acquired a competent knowledge of any of the Dravidian languages—say Tamil—to regard otherwise than with respect the intellectual capacity of a people amongst whom so wonderful an organ of thought has been developed. On the other hand, in consequence of the almost exclusive devotion of the native literati to grammatical studies they have fallen considerably behind the educated classes in Europe in grasp and comprehensiveness. What they have gained in acuteness, they have lost in breadth. They have never attempted to compare their own languages with others—not even with other languages of the same family. They have never grasped the idea that such a thing as a family of languages existed. Consequently the interest they took in the study of their languages was not an intelligent, discriminating interest, and proved much less fruitful in results than might fairly have been expected. Their philology, if it can be called by that name, has remained up to our own time as rudimentary and fragmentary as it was ages ago. Not having become comparative, it has not become scientific and progressive. The comparative method of study has done much, in every department of science, for Europe; might it not be expected to do much for India also? If the natives of Southern India began to take an interest in the comparative study of their own languages and in comparative philology in general, they would find it in a variety of ways much more useful to them than the study of the grammar of their own language alone ever has been. They would cease to content themselves with learning by rote versified enigmas and harmonious platitudes. They would begin to discern the real aims and objects of language, and realise the fact that language has a history of its own, throwing light upon all other history, and rendering ethnology and archaeology possible. They would find that philology studied in this manner enlarged the mind instead of cramping it, extended its horizon, and provided it with a plentiful store of matters of wide human interest. And the consequence probably would be that a more critical, scholarly habit of mind, showing itself in a warmer desire for the discovery of truth, would begin to prevail. Another result—not perhaps so immediate, but probably in the end as certain—a result of priceless value—would be the development of a good, readable, respectable, useful, Dravidian literature—a literature written in a style free at once from pedantry and from vulgarisms, and in matter, tone, and tendency, as well as in style, worthy of so intelligent a people as the natives of Southern India undoubtedly are.

I trust the interest taken in their language, literature, and antiquities by foreigners will not be without its effect in kindling amongst the natives of Southern India a little wholesome, friendly rivalry. If a fair proportion of the educated native inhabitants of each district were only to apply themselves to the study of the philology and archaeology of their district with anything like the same amount of zeal with which the philology and archaeology of Europe are studied by educated Europeans, the result would probably be that many questions which are now regarded as insoluble would speedily be solved, and that pursuits now generally regarded as barren would be found full of fruit.

Native pandits have never been surpassed in patient labour or in an accurate knowledge of details. They require in addition that zeal for historic truth and that power of discrimination, as well as of generalisation, which have hitherto been supposed to be special characteristics of the European mind. Both these classes of qualities seem to me to be combined in a remarkable degree in the articles recently contributed by learned natives to the Bombay Indian Antiquary on subjects connected with the languages and literature of Northern India; and those articles appear to me to be valuable not only in themselves, but also as giving the world a specimen of the kind of results that might be expected if learned natives of Southern India entered, in the same critical, careful spirit, on the cultivation of the similar, though hitherto much-neglected, field of literary labour, which may be regarded as specially their own."

[a.a.O., S. ix ff.]



Object in view, investigation and illustration of grammatical structure of Dravidian languages. Those languages the vernaculars of Southern India, 1. Position of Sanskrit and Hindûstânî, 2. Position of English. Note.—Sir Erskine Perry ; English included in General Test.

Use of the Common Term ‘ Dravidian,’ .

Dravidian Languages at one time styled ‘ Tamulian.' Kumârilabhatta’s term, Ândhra-Drâvida bhâshâ, 3. Note.—Dr Burnell’s remarks, 4. Reasons for choosing the term Dravidian : Manu’s use of ‘Dravida,’ 5. Use of ‘Drâvidî’ by philological writers, 6. Division of Indian vernaculars by Northern Pandits into two classes—Gauras and Drâviras, 7. No common term used by native Dravidian scholars ; Varâha-mihira’s local knowledge.

Enumeration of Dravidian Languages,

Six Cultivated Dialects.
Six Uncultivated Dialects.

I. Tamil,

Where spoken, 9. Name of Madras ; spelling of ‘Tamil,’ 10. Tamil erroneously called ‘Malabar;’ origin of the error; Professor Max Müller ; Dr Hunter, 11. Colebooke ; first book printed in Tamil, 12. ‘Dravida’ corresponds to ‘Tamil’ in Sanskrit; proof of this; Varahâ-mihira, Târanâtha, Mahâwanso, 13. Asôka’s inscription ; Peutinger Tables ; Ravenna geographer, 14. Derivation of native pandits ; names of three subdivisions of Tamil people ; Pândya ; Singhalese traditions, Mahâbhârata ; Pândyas on Malabar coast ; Note—Embassy of King Pandion to Augustus, 15. Pândyas as known to the Greeks, 16. Pliny’s references to the Pândyas; Chôla.—Aśôka’s inscription, Ptolemy, Hwen Thsang; capital of the Chôlas, extent of their power, 17. Chêra.— Various shapes of this name ; original identity of the three subdivisions of the Tamil people ; native tradition, representations in Sanskrit, 18. Why is Tamil called ‘Aravam?' Various theories, 19. Why are Tamilians called Tigalar by the Canarese ?

II. Malayâlam, .       .       .       .       .       .       .

Where spoken, 20. Origin of the name ‘ Malayâlam,’ 21. Different shapes of the name Kêrala ; identity with ‘ Chêra ; ’ meaning of ‘ Kongu,’ 22. Cosmas Indicopleustes’ Malé ; period of separation of Malayâlam from Tamil, 23. Configuration of the country.

Origin of the term ' Coromandel,'          

Fra Paulino’s supposition ; use of 'Choramandala’ by the first Portuguese ; equivalent of Ma’bar, 25. Derivation from name of village of Coromandel inadmissible; Colonel Yule’s communication.

Origin of the term ‘ Malabar,'    

Use of first part of the name amongst Greeks and Arabians ; use of the affix bâr amongst Arabians and early Europeans ; origin of bâr, 27. Suggestion of Dr Gundert; Colonel Yule’s communication; Maldives ; Persian bâr; origin of wâr of Kattywar, &c.; Dr Trumpp.

III. Telugu,

Where spoken, 29. Eastern ‘Klings;’ Sanskrit Ândhra ; Andhras in the Vedas and the Greek writers, 30. Derivation of the name Telugu ; native derivation regarded by Mr C. P. Brown as inaccurate, 31. Traces of Trilingam ; traces of Trikalinga; meaning of Vadugu.

IV. Canarese,

Where spoken, 33. Derivation of the name Karnâtaka; different applications of the name.

V. Tulu,

Where spoken; Tulu a highly-developed language; to which Dravidian language most nearly allied ?

VI. Kudagu or Coorg, .

Where spoken ; which Dravidian language it resembles most; doubtful whether it should be placed amongst the cultivated class.

VII. Tuda,

Where spoken; Tudas the smallest of Dravidian tribes; books about the Tudas and their language.

VIII. Kôta,.

Where spoken; characteristics of the language.

IX. Gônd,

Gôndwana ; numbers of the Gônds; different tribes ; Kôîtôrs.

X. Khond or Ku, .

Where spoken; human sacrifices; origin of name.

XI. Mâler or Râjmahâl,

Where spoken; language different from that of the Santals.

XII. Orâon,

Relationships of this tribe and their language, 39. Amount of the Dravidian element in the Miller and Orâon not clearly ascertained, 40. Census of peoples and tribes speaking Dravidian languages, 41. Tribes not enumerated; Kolarian tribes, 42. Tribes of the North-Eastern frontier; Brahui contains a Dravidian element; Dravidians seem to have entered India from the North-West, 43.

The Dravidian idioms not merely provincial dialects of the same language,

People not mutually understood; Tamil and Telugu furthest apart.

The Dravidian Languages independent of Sanskrit, .      .      

Supposition of the northern pandits that the South-Indian vernaculars were derived from Sanskrit erroneous, 43. List of sixty words in Sanskrit and Tamil, 48. Ancient dialect of Tamil contains little Sanskrit, 49. Relation of English to Latin, and of Tamil to Sanskrit, illustrated by a comparison of Ten Commandments in English and Tamil, 49. Archbishop Trench’s expressions, 50. Tamil less studied than other dialects by Brâhmans, 51. Thirteen particulars in which the Dravidian languages differ essentially from Sanskrit, 52-54. Are there traces of Scythian influences in Sanskrit itself? Mr Edkins’s “ China’s Place in Philology," 54 ; Note.—Structure of Japanese.

Is there a Dravidian element in the Vernacular Languages of Northern India?

Hypothesis that the corruption of Sanskrit out of which the Northern vernaculars have arisen was due to the Dravidian languages considered; general conclusion that the modifying influences, though probably Scythian or non-Aryan, do not appear to have been distinctively Dravidian, 56-64.

To what group of Languages are the Dravidian idioms to be affiliated ? .

Professor Rask’s opinion, 64. Meaning of the term ‘ Scythian ; ’ Professor Max Müller, 65. Intercomparison of the Scythian languages themselves should be carried further, 66. Some of the resemblances incapable of being accounted for by accident, 67. The original unity of languages probable, 68. Confirmation of the Scythian theory by the Behistun Tablets, 68. Principal points of resemblance between the language of the Tablets and the Dravidian languages, 69, 70. The existence of any analogy between the Dravidian languages and the Finno-Ugrian tends to confirm the argument for the original oneness of the human race, 71. Note.—Professor Hunfalvy, 71. Indo-European languages not so prolific of differences as Scythian, 72. Relationship of Dravidian languages to Scythian not universally admitted; Dr Pope’s remarks, 73. Mr Cover’s “ Folk-Songs; ’’ Indo-European analogies discoverable in the Dravidian languages, 74. Dr Bleek’s remarks; possibility of developments ab intra, 75. List of primitive Indo-Europeanisms discoverable in the Dravidian languages, 76. Position between Indo-European and Scythian languages occupied by Dravidian ; existence of a few Semitic analogies, 77. Australian affinities, 78, 79. Resemblances discoverable in an African language, 80.

Which language or dialect best represents the primitive condition of the Dravidian tongues? .

No one dialect implicitly to be followed; a comparison of all existing dialects our safest guide.

1. Literary, classical dialects of the Dravidian languages: to what extent may they be regarded as representing the primitive condition of those languages?  

As soon as the Indian languages begin to be cultivated, the literary style has a tendency to become a literary language, 81. Illustrations from Northern India; the same tendency in the Dravidian languages, 82. High Tamil, 83.

2. High antiquity of the literary cultivation of Tamil,

Six reasons for inferring its relatively high antiquity, 84, 85. The Sanskrit words contained in Tamil belong to three different periods; Note—Carnatic temples, 86. Remarkable corruptions of certain Sanskrit words, 87. Tamil inscriptions, 88. Characters in which those inscriptions are written; character of Jewish and Christian tablets; Note—Historical information contained in those inscriptions; language of those inscriptions Tamil; inferences from this; Note—Meaning of the phrase opposite a year, 89.

Earliest extant Written Relics of the Dravidian Languages,

Dravidian words in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, 91, 92. Earliest Dravidian word in Greek, Ctesias’s name for cinnamon, 93. Largest stock of Dravidian words found in names of places mentioned by Ptolemy and the other Greek geographers, 94. List of these words, 94-104. Condition of the Dravidian languages scarcely at all changed since the time of the Greeks, 104. Note.—Roman coins; dates of Greek geographers, 105. Words of the Turks of the Altai preserved by the Chinese ; period when the Dravidian speech divided into dialects, 106.

Political and Social Relation of the Primitive Dravidians to the Aryan and Prae-Aryan Inhabitants of Northern India,

Were the Dravidians identical with the aborigines whom the Aryans found in India ? 107. Relations of the Dravidians to the Aryans seem to have been always peaceable, 108. Dravidians may have been preceded by another Scythian race, 109. Mr Curzon’s opinion ; immigrations from India to Ceylon and back again ; Note.—Sanskrit and Dravidian names for the points of the compass, 110.

Original Use and Progressive Extension of the term ‘Śûdra,’ .

Ethnological value of Manu’s classification, 111. Were the Śûdras of the same race as the Aryans, or of a different race? Lassen’s supposition, 112. Sanskrit authorities quoted, 113. Aryanisation of the Dravidians the result, not of conquest, but of colonisation ; Note—Śagara’s distinguishing marks ; long hair of the Dravidians, 114. Connection of the Pândyas with the Pândavas ; Note—Professor Max Müller's remarks, 115. Dravidians called Śûdras by the Brâhmans; Śûdra has a higher meaning in the South than in the North, 116.

Prae-Aryan Civilisation of the Dravidians,

Testimony of the Dravidian vocabulary, when freed from its Sanskrit, 117, 118.

Probable date of Aryan civilisation of the Dravidians,

First city and state of the Dravidians probably Kolkei on the Tâmraparni; Agastya, the traditional leader of the first Brâhman colony, 119. Agastya’s age; references to Dravidas, &c., in Manu and the Mahâbhârata ; Note—name of Agastya’s mountain, 120. References to early Dravidians in Mahâ-wanso, 121. Inference from Kumârila-bhatta’s reference to the Dravidians; names of places recorded by the Greeks Brahmanical; suppositions respecting earliest Dravidian characters, 122.

Relative Antiquity of Dravidian Literature,

Age of Telugu Literature.

A few works composed towards the end of the twelfth century, nearly all the rest in the fourteenth and subsequent centuries ; Vemana’s poems, 123.

Age of Canarese Literature.

New light thrown on age of Canarese literature by Mr Kittel’s publication of Kêśava’s Grammar of Ancient Canarese; age of Kêśava; probably he lived about the end of the twelfth century, 124.

Age of Malayâlam Literature.

Dr Gundert’s statements; earliest phase of the language exhibited in the Râma Charita, 125.

Age of Tamil Literature.

Position of Agastya in Tamil literature; works ascribed to Agastya not genuine, 126. Stanza attributed to him ; grammar of Tolkâppiyan ; Age of most Hindû writings unknown; Tamil literature may be arranged in cycles, 127.

(1.) The Jaina Cycle.

Reasons for not styling this the cycle of the Madura College, 128. Oldest Tamil works extant appear to have been written by Jainas; duration of Jaina period; Note—Dr Burnell’s remarks, 129. The Kural; reasons for assigning it to the tenth century, 130. Relation of Kural to Madura College, 131. Nâladiyâr and Chintâmani; classical dictionaries, 132.

(2.) The Tamil Râmâyana Cycle.

Differences between the Tamil version and the Sanskrit original, 133. Many poets lived at this period; date prefixed to the poem too early, 134. Relation of this poem to the reigns of Râjêndra Chôla and Kulôtunga Chôla; Rajendra’s date, 135. Date of Râmânuja, 136. Auveiyar’s date ; the turkey; Mr Scott’s rendering, 137.

(3.) The Śaiva Revival Cycle.

Two large collections of poems belong to this cycle, 138. This cycle identical with the reign of Sundara Pândya; was this prince identical with Marco Polo’s Sender-bandi ? his date beset with difficulties, 139. Reasons for placing him later than the eleventh century, 140. Statements of Muhammedan historians respecting two Sundaras, 141. Madura inscription ; Muhammedan influences, 142.

(4.) The Vaishnava Cycle.

Poetical compositions of the disciples of Râmânuja; their date uncertain, 143. No reference in Śaiva poems to the Vaishnava ones, and vice versâ, 143.

(5.) The Cycle of the Literary Revival, .       .       .       .       .

The head of this new period one of the Pândya princes ; characteristics of the poems of this period, 144. Ati-Vîra-Râma Pândya’s date discovered in an inscription, 145. Relation of the Pândya princes of that period to the Nâyaks of Madura, 145.

(6.) The Anti-Brahmanical Cycle,      .       .      .      

Compositions of the so-called Sittar school; characteristics of these compositions, 146. The writers of this school acquainted with Christianity, 147. Quotations from Śiva-vâkyar, 148.

(7.) The Modern Writers,

Their works numerous, but not generally valuable; Beschi’s great poem, 149. Introduction of good colloquial prose, 150. Comparison between the number of books printed in Bengali and in Tamil; characteristics of Dravidian poetry ; alliteration and rhyme, 151. Mental physiology of Indo-Europeans and Dravidians illustrated by their language; reason why literature could not flourish, 152. New stimulus now given to the native mind, 153.

[Es folgt eine umfangreiche COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR.]

APPENDIX, ........510

I. Minor Dravidian Dialects and Brahuî,

1. Tuda. Information derived from Dr Pope, Mr Metz, and Colonel Marshall, 510. Dr Pope’s conclusions respecting Tuda; 2. Kôta ; who are the Kôtas ? paradigm of pronoun and verb; resemblance to Ancient Canarese, 512. 3. Gônd; publications by Mr Driberg and Mr Dawson ; particulars in which Gônd agrees with Telugu and Canarese; more numerous particulars in which it agrees with Tamil, 513. Particulars in which it takes a course of its own, 514, 515. 4. Ku; Mr Latchmaji’s Grammar; Note.—agreements and disagreements with other idioms, 516. 5. Râjmahâl; list of words defective; contains Dravidian element, 517. 6. Orâon ; Mr Batsch’s “ Grammar and Vocabulary ; ” Orâon more distinctively Dravidian, 518. Dravidian words in Orâon; 7. Dravidian element in Brahuî. Dr Bellew’s book, 518. Brahuî contains many Scythian elements, some distinctively Dravidian, 519. Illustrations of the Dravidian element, 520. Difference between Brahuî and languages of the North-Eastern frontier, 521.

II. Remarks on the Philological Portion of Mr Cover's “Folk-Songs of Southern India,”

Real nature of the theory respecting the relationship of the Dravidian languages to the languages of the Scythian group advocated in the first edition of this work. Reprint of an article in Madras Mail, 1872.

Literary merits of Mr Cover’s book, 522. Advance in philological science since issue of first edition of this work, 523. Little advance outside the Aryan family, 524. Dr Caldwell’s theory explained, 525. Illustrative quotations, 526. That theory wide enough to include Mr Cover’s theory, 527. Criticism in Journal of American Oriental Society; any attempt to prove Dravidian languages distinctively Aryan will be open to keen scrutiny, 528. Origin of Dravidian word for ‘devil,’ 529-31. Dravidian words for ‘light,’ 532-33. Consequences of Scythic theory not so serious as Mr Gover supposed ; Dr Farrar, 534. Earliest Aryans and earliest Turanians not widely different, 535.

III. Sundara Pândya,

Extracts from Muhammedan historians referred to in Introduction; passages from Rashiduddin, 535. Passages from Wassaf, 536. Who was Kales Dewar ? 537. Mr Rhys Davids’s extract from Singhalese records respecting king Kulsekhara, 538. Occurrence in two different connections of the same three names, 539. Invasion of Malik Kafûr, 540.

IV. Are the Pariars (Pareiyas) of Southern India Dravidians?

Supposition that the lower classes of Southern India are not Hindûs, 540. ‘ Hindu’ has become a term of religion, 541. Discrepancies in use of this term ; University use ; Mr Beames, 542. Are Shanars not Hindûs ? Supposition of Europeans respecting origin of Pareiyas, 543. Origin of ‘mixed castes’ fictitious ; children of dancing-girls, 514. Pareiyas have a caste of their own; numbers, 545. Are Pareiyas Dravidians ? Theory that they are pre-Dravidians, 546. Arguments in support of this theory, 547. Special privileges enjoyed by lower castes; Mr Walhouse, 548. Meaning of name Pareiya, 549. Meaning of corresponding Telugu, Mala, and Malayâlam Puleiya, 550. Still stronger arguments adducible against this theory, 551, 552. Effect of caste differences, 553. Essential unity of all Dravidian dialects argues unity of race, 554.

V. Are the Neilgherry (Nilagiri) Tudas Dravidians?

Much more known now about the Tudas ; Mr Metz; Dr Pope ; Colonel Marshall, 555. Reasons for supposing the Tudas a different race from their neighbours, 556. Those reasons inadequate, 557. Tudas probably Dravidians, 558.

VI. Dravidian Physical Type, .      .      .      .      .      .55

Conclusion derived from lingual comparison; Gônds belong to the same race ; have the Gônds degenerated, or the South-Indian Dravidians risen? 558. Mr Hodgson’s comparison of Aryan and Tamilian types; Professor Max Muller’s statement, 559. Puranic statements ; Dravidians of the South not Nishâdas, 560. Quatrefage’s theory ; differences in feature accounted for, 561. Type of higher classes ; Tuda type, 562. Colour of skin not necessarily unaccountable, 563. Blackening influence of heat; local illustration, 564. Shanars ; Portuguese ; Brahmans, 565. Strabo and Herodotus ; peculiar blackness of Puleiyas on Malabar coast not easily accounted for, 566. Gônd type, Negrito or Mongolian ? Mr Hislop, 567. Central Provinces Gazetteer; mental development of Gônds, 568. Ascent from Mongolian type to Caucasian not unknown ; Indian Mohammedans, 569. Dr Carpenter’s remarks on European examples of this ascent, 570. Magyar type, 571. Mongolian-looking Indian tribes entered by north-east; statement of Periplus, 572. Colonel Dalton’s photographs; Sir George Campbell’s “ Ethnology of India,’’ 573. Supposes the majority of South Indians of good caste to be Aryans; little or no ethnological objection to this theory, 574. Historical and linguistic difficulties numerous, 575. Statement of those difficulties, 576-78.

VII. Ancient Religion of the Dravidians,

Religious usages of ancient Aryans, 579. Demonolatry of primitive Dravidians; Shamanism ; Note.—origin of word ‘Shaman,’ 580. Peculiarities of Shamanite worship ; Note.—Demonolatry of Ceylon; demoniacal element even in the Veda; explanation of sacrifice of Daksha, 581. Quotations illustrative of Shamanism from Marco Polo, Mr Hodgson and others, 582-84. Shanar demonolatrous rites, 585. Similar system in Mysore; also in Chûtiâ Nâgpûr, 586. Substantial identity of the two demonolatries, 587. Religion of the Khonds; religion of the Tudas, 588. Colonel Marshall’s researches and explanations, 589-90. Certain so-called Druidical remains erroneously attributed to the Tudas; Note.—Glazed pottery; Dr Hunter, 591. Antiquity of the cairns, 592. Discovery of similar cairns in many other places, 593. Different kinds of cairns ; information supplied by Mr Metz, 593. Hindûs of the plains know nothing of the people who disposed of their dead in this manner ; meaning of Tamil names for cairns, 594. Malayalam name, 595. Theories respecting origin of people referred to, 596. General conclusion respecting religion of ancient Dravidians, 597."

[a.a.O., S. xvii - xxii ; xli - xlii]


Madras Presidency: Ausbreitung des "Neo-Shaivism" durch

"(Re)assertions of Tamil’s divinity (teyvattanmai [தெய்வத்தன்மை]) accompanied a wave of religious revivalism which surfaced in the Madras Presidency in the closing decades of the nineteenth century, primarily centered around a reworking of Shaivism, declared the most ancient and authentic religion of those Tamilians who were not Aryan Brahmans. Neo-Shaivism, as I shall refer to this reformulated religion, began to make its presence felt from around the 1880s through the publishing and organizational activities of some its principal exponents, such as P. Sundaram Pillai, J. M. Nallaswami Pillai (1864-1920), P. V. Manikkam Nayakar (1871-1931), K. Subramania Pillai (1888-1945), Nilambikai Ammai (1903-45), and, most prolific of all, Maraimalai Adigal (1876-1950). These reformers typically hailed from the ranks of the new elites spawned by colonialism everywhere in India: they were educated, urban, middleclass, upper-caste “non-Brahman” professionals and government employees. They may have disagreed with each other on finer points of terminology or doctrine, but they were unanimous in their demand for the removal of “polytheistic” religious practices, claimed to have been introduced into a pristine Shaivism by Aryan Brahmans from the North through their linguistic vehicle, Sanskrit. Their program was puritanical and elitist as well in its advocacy of vegetarianism and teetotalism, and in its call for the excision of “irrational” customs and rituals (animal sacrifices, the worship of godlings, and the like) which were the very stuff of village and popular religion. For the true “Tamil religion” (tamilar matam [தமிழர் மதம்]), they insisted, was the monotheistic, “rational” worship of Shiva using pure Tamil rituals based on Tamil scriptures performed by Tamil (“non-Brahman”) priests through the liturgical medium of divine Tamil (Alarmelmankai 1914; Maraimalai Adigal 1930a, 1974b; K. Subramania Pillai 1940; Swaminatha Upatiyayan 1921)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 25. -- Fair use]


Kumbakonam (Tamil கும்பகோணம்):

"Clearly, only didactic and religious works were counted for in the pre-modern canon. This point is made rather dramatically by U. V. Swaminatha Iyer [Tamil உ. வே. சாமிநாதையர்] (1855-1942), the legendary editor of Tamil classics. On Thursday, 21 October 1880, U.V. Swaminatha Iyer, then a 25-year-old teacher at the Kumbakonam Government College, went to meet Salem Ramaswami Mudalia [Tamil சேலம் இராமசாமி முதலியார், 1853 - 1892], a civil munsif who had recently been transferred to the small town of Kumbakonam. Swaminatha Iyer had been a pupil of Mahavidwan Meenakshisundaram Pillai [Tamil மீனாட்சிசுந்தரம் பிள்ளை, 1815 - 1876], acknowledged as the finest Tamil teacher of the nineteenth century. Salem Ramaswamy Mudaliar had arrived with the reputation of being a liberal man with a broad outlook who patronised scholarship. In an obvious attempt to win his friendship and ingratiate himself, Swaminatha Iyer had ventured to meet him, at the instance of the pontiff of  Thiruvadudurai Adheenam, at his home. What transpired at this meeting is dramatically narrated by Swaminatha Iyer, in his famed autobiography.

'With whom did you study,’ Salem Ramaswamy Mudaliar queried. 'Mahavidwan Meenakshisundaram Pillai,’ I replied.

I expected the uttering of Pillai’s name to create a ripple. Even if he did not respect my official position, perhaps he could at least open out to me as a student of Pillai? He did not and spoke in a measured manner. . . . He continued with his questions ‘What did you study?’ came the next question. Certain that I could dazzle him with a reply to this question, I listed the texts that I had studied:

  • Kudandai Andadhi,

  • Marasai Andadhi,

  • Pugalur Andadhi,

  • Thiruvarangathandadhi,

  • Alagarandadhi,

  • Kambarandadhi,

  • Mullai Andadhi,

  • Meenatchiyammai Pillai Tamil,

  • Muthukumaraswamy Pillai Tamil,

  • Akilandanayaki Pillai Tamil, S

  • ekkilar Pillai Tamil,

  • Thirukkovaiyar,

  • Tanjaivanan Kovai. . . .

Twenty andadhis [அந்தாதி], twenty kalambakams [கலம்பக], fifteen kovais, thirty Pillai Tamils, twenty ulas—thus I listed a number of prabandams [பிரபந்தம்]. There was not a trace of wonderment on his face.

Suddenly, he interjected, ‘What is it worth?’ I was not a little disappointed. ... I did not give up and began a list of Puranams [புராணம்]: ‘Thiruvilaiyadal Puranam, Thirunagaikkarona Puranam, Mayura Puranam, Kanda Puranam, Periya Puranam, Kuttrala Puranam... He continued to look still like a graven image.

‘Naidadam, Prabulinga Leelai, Sivagnana Bodham, Sivagnana Sithiyar,' I continued. Gave the names of some grammars. He continued to remain unmoved. With the thought that I had forgotten the most important of them all, I said, ‘I have read Kambaramayanam in full two to three times over....’

‘It is good that you have read all these later day works. Have you read any of the ancient texts?’ he asked....

‘There are so many old works among those I have listed!’ I replied. Only when he countered me with the question ‘Have you read the texts which are the wellsprings of these texts?’, did I realise that he was up to something.

‘I don’t know the texts you are talking about?’

‘Have you read Seevaka Chinthamani? Manimekalai?’

I had not read the books he mentioned. Nor had my teacher. I had never even set my eyes on these texts. I thought to myself, ‘Without considering the many books I had studied, why should this man make a big issue of my not having read these couple of books’ and prided myself on this. ‘I had no access to these books. If I did I am confident of reading them’ I replied emphatically.

No doubt, U.V. Swaminatha Iyer’s account of this meeting with Salem Ramaswamy Mudaliar is highly dramatised and some matters of fact are suspect. (Contrary to what U.V. Swaminatha Iyer would have us believe, one canto of Seevaka Chinthamani was already a prescribed text and Henry Bower had published it way back in 1868. Mahavidwan Meenakshisundaram Pillai had actually copied the text with Nachinarkkiniyar’s commentary and deposited it in the Thiruvadudurai Mutt’s library.) But it highlights rather emphatically the conflict that was emerging in the later part of the nineteenth century, over what was the real canon, the great tradition. U.V. Swaminatha Iyer’s long list in a sense provides an inventory of works constituting the pre-modern canon. It makes no mention of the entire body of Sangam literature and the epics, and is dominated by texts that are now designated as chittrilakkiyam [Minor Literature]. His list may be compared to the canonical works mentioned and discussed in two important pre-colonial Tamil texts useful for understanding Tamil literary history."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint:

 சீவக சிந்தாமணி (Cīvaka Cintāmaṇi) / hrsg. von U. V. Swaminatha Iyer (Tamil உ. வே. சாமிநாதையர் - U. Vē. Cāminātaiyar, 1855 - 1942)

"It was the year 1887 in Madras city. After more than six years of laboring over the palm-leaf manuscript of the ancient epic poem Civaka Cintamani, Swaminatha Aiyar had just handed over the final sections of the text to his printer. For the past few years, his entire life had been wrapped up in the Cintamani: he woke up thinking about it and stayed up late into the night, deciphering and transcribing archaic words. His fingers were sore from turning over the brittle leaves of the manuscript, and his eyes ached from going over proofs by the dim light of oil lamps. He had spent most of his summer and winter vacations, and all other days he could steal from his teaching responsibilities, travelling back and forth between the printer’s workshop, in Madras city, and his college and home, far south in Kumbakonam. There had been moments of great anxiety when he had been convulsed with fear he would run out of money, that the press would burn down, or that malcontents would tamper with his proofs. But all that was now in the past. He had seen the work through to its final printed form. It was only then, after all those years of laboring day and night, that he allowed himself the luxury of succumbing to his tiredness. He was still at the printer’s. He laid himself down, right there and then on the floor, and slept deeply and happily. When he woke up, he saw a man standing before him. “Here, sir, is the Pattuppattu” the man said, and handed over to Swaminathan another palm-leaf manuscript. He thought, “Tamilannai [Tamiḻttāy - தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] herself has sent [this man], commanding me to go on with my service to Tamil,” and he addressed her:

“O mother! You have (re)adorned yourself with the Cintamani that I, your poor devotee, gave back to you. Continue to offer me grace, so that I, your servant, can go on with my work of recovering all your other jewels.”

So saying, he reverenced Tamilttay with all his heart, and continued, he tells us, for the rest of his life trying to fulfill her wishes (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 612-13)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 179f. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint der Malayalam Roman

ഒ. ചന്തുമേനോൻ [O. Chandu Menon] < 1847 – 1899>: ഇന്ദുലേഖ [Indulekha]

Abb.: Einbandtitel

"Parenthetically and briefly, Indulekha discussed whether the newly formed Congress was anti-British: being anti-British was seen as a risk or a flaw. For men like Bonnerjee and Naoroji, it was a charge to be refuted.

Yet Indulekha is not a text in colonialism’s defence. As the scholar G. Arunima puts it, the novel provides ‘a complex engagement with nationalism and colonialism’. Among the questions it touches upon is the equation between one of the Malayali world’s most energetic castes, the Nairs [Malayalam നായർ] (still called Sudras at the time, including by some Nairs), and that world’s ‘highest’ caste, the Nambudiri Brahmins [Malayalam നമ്പൂതിരി].

The novel’s story revolves around a love affair between two Nairs: Indulekha and Madhavan, an English-educated student waiting to graduate from Madras University before starting a legal career. Though not receiving any formal school education, Indulekha is fluent in both English and Sanskrit, having been trained at home by the best teachers.

In Arunima’s words,

 ‘By making Indulekha, a Sudra (Nayar) woman, a Sanskrit scholar, Chandu Menon made a serious critique of the caste pretensions of the Brahmins.’

Menon also makes Indulekha the winner in an argument she has with a pretentious Nambudiri.

Son of a prosperous Nair tahsildar in Madras Presidency’s Malabar district, Chandu Menon went to a school started by the Basel Mission in the coastal town of Talasseri, but he was also taught Malayalam, Sanskrit and Hindustani at home. Learning the law without going to a law college and gaining admiration for acuteness and impartiality, he became, unusually for an Indian in his time, a sub-judge.

Work took Menon to the spaces of British officials, who were appreciative of his abilities, but one of them, G. R. Sharp, went too far when, on one occasion, he caught hold of Menon’s kuduma (hairknot) and suggested its removal. Indulekha contains a hint of the offending incident.

Along with colonial rule, shoes and slippers were introduced to the Malabar countryside, but custom forbade footwear before superiors or elders. When Menon saw one day, in front of his house, a subordinate of his, a Tamil Brahmin, carrying something wrapped in paper, he asked, ‘Sweets?’ ‘No, sir,’ the man replied, ‘these are my new slippers.’ This incident too found a place in Indulekha.

Recognizing that new customs threatened long-nursed pictures of an Indian self, and of the standing in society of an Indian’s caste, Indulekha seemed to point out that a native could accept, reject or modify the colonizing world’s offerings.

A mixed response was the ground reality. While Western impact caused a few Nairs like Chandu Menon’s father to give his son a paternal prefix (Oyyarathu in this case), the great majority chose to remain linked in their names to their mother’s taravad [തറവാട്], her house and lineage.

Allowing Malayalis to smile at changes in their society and also at the odd ways of their new masters, Indulekha captivated Nair households because its Malayalam was closer to the spoken idiom, and because it told a story near to their lives or hopes, not a tale of ages gone by, or of ‘the marvels of gods and goddesses, recoverable only through the medium of a pristine, Sanskritized language’.

Even if, as Chandu Menon conceded, there were very few actual Indulekhas in 1889, a great many Malayali young women were willing to imagine themselves as future Indulekhas."

[Quelle: Rajmohan Gandhi (Hindi राजमोहन गांधी, 1935 - ): Modern South India : A history from the 17th century to our times. -- New Delhi : Aleph, 2018. -- S. 221ff. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint das Tamil Drama:

P. Sundaram Pillai (Tamil பெ. சுந்தரம் பிள்ளை - Pe. Cuntaram Piḷḷai, 1855 - 1897): மனோன்மணீயம் - Maṉōṉmaṇīyam [Manonmaniam]

"My first introduction to Tamilttai [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] came in 1988 when I chanced upon an anthology of poems called Moliyaraci, “Queen language.” Its very first selection, drawn from an 1891 play, Manonmaniyam, by P. Sundaram Pillai (1855-97), represented the earth as a woman whose beautiful face is paratak kantam [பாராட்டாக கண்டம் = Kontinent des Lobes] (India) and whose radiant brow is the southern peninsula. The tiravita natu [திராவிட நாடு] (Dravidian land) adorns that brow as an auspicious tilakam (sacred mark). The poem then declared:

O great goddess Tamil (tamil ananku)!
Like the fragrance of that
tilakam [திலகம்], your fame spreads in all directions, and delights the whole world.
Spellbound in admiration of your splendid youth and power, we offer you our homage.

The poem went on in this vein for several more verses (Velayutam Pillai 1971: 1-3). My interest in it was further piqued when I discovered that its first verse was institutionalized in June 1970 as the Tamilnadu state’s “prayer song.” The government’s reasons for doing this are telling:

It is observed by Government that many prayer songs are being sung at the commencement of functions organized by Government or attended by Ministers. In order to ensure uniformity in the singing of prayer songs, the Government have been for some time considering whether a theme might be chosen for being rendered as a prayer song, which will have no religious or sectarian association. After very careful consideration, the Government have decided that the piece containing six lines from Thiru. [Mr.] Sundaram Pillai’s “Manonmaneeyam” which is an invocation to the Goddess of Tamil, would be an appropriate theme for being rendered as a prayer song."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 17f. -- Fair use]


Travancore (Malayalam തിരുവിതാംകൂർ): Malayali Memorial

"Thus, the main agitation in these three states [Travancore, Mysore, Cochin] concentrated mainly on charges of non-appointment of natives in government services. While in Mysore the grievance against ‘foreign Dewans’ was projected in the press and in the Legislature, in Travancore the grievance was projected in a more dramatic way in the presentation of the Malayali Memorial in 1891.

This Memorial had been preceded by a one-man agitation put up by G. Parameswara Pillai, who under the pseudonym ‘Pro-Patra’, in an open letter to Lord Connemara, the Governor of Madras in 1887, complained that from 1817 to 1872, the country in the hands of eight Rao Dewans had seen the introduction of relations and friends, and relations' friends, and friends’ friends of the Dewans into the high offices of the state.

The mammoth Malayali Memorial signed by 19,038 was an exercise in statistical study which drove home the same point with a greater poignancy and brutality—as all statistically arraigned data do—the iniquity suffered by the natives of the states at the hands of the foreign Dewans.

The ammunition for the charge was inadvertently provided by the then Dewan of Travancore, Mr. Rama Rao himself, in publishing A Summary of the "Returns of the Public Servants in the State", which for the first time disclosed to the public view the unjust distribution of government appointments among the different castes. The Memorial pointed out that of the 16,167 posts in government service, 3,407 posts with salaries above Rs. 10, 1,444 posts were held by foreign Hindus. If one were to take the higher salaries into consideration, the divergence became more marked, in that the average daily salary earning of the foreign Brahmin was equivalent of Rs. 6.77 ps. as against an earning of 12 ps. for Malayali Sudras and 13 ps. for a Christian.

What emphasised the point even more clearly was the comparative analysis made in the Memorial between the position of the Malayali in British Malabar with that of Travancore State. With a comparable area, population and number of graduates, Travancore had a lower precentage of positions held by Malayalis than in Malabar.

As could be expected, the publication of this Memorial was received with great sympathy in the other two states. The Karnataka Prakasika of Mysore ran a four parts serial on this, concluding with the warning that the Memorial ought to teach a lesson to people nearer home."

[Quelle: Vanaja Rangaswami: The story of integration : A new interpretation in the context of the democratic movements in the princely states of Mysore, Travancore and Cochin 1900 - 1947. -- New Delhi : Manohar, 1981. -- S. 31f. -- Online: The story of integration : a new interpretation in the context of the democratic movements in the princely states of Mysore, Travancore, and Cochin, 1900-1947 : Rangaswami, Vanaja : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Kodaikanal (Tamil கொடைக்கானல்): Tod von Robert_Caldwell (1814 - 1891)

"Robert Caldwell, born in Ireland in 1814, arrived in Madras in 1838 as a missionary for the London Missionary Society. He spent most of his life in the small town of Idayankudi near Tirunelveli with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and in 1877 he became bishop of Tinnevelli. A fellow devotee, R. P. Sethu Pillai, writes with affection that in the fifty-odd years he worked in Tamilnadu, Caldwell went home on furlough only three times. When he went back to England the third time, his friends there begged him to stay. But he refused.

“I have lived all these years for Indians. As long I am alive, I will toil for them. I will give up my life in their land.”

And so he did, and when he died in 1891, he was buried in Idayankudi on the grounds of the church that he had himself built.

“Caldwell Aiyar worked selflessly for fifty-three years for Tamilnadu. Is he not one of Tamiḻttāy's [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] true sons?”

concludes Sethu Pillai (1964: 32)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 192f. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Vorlesung von T. T. Saravanmuttu Pillai, Bibliothekar am Presidency College über "The study of Tamil literature:

"What is the glory of the Tamil language?. . . . Was not the Tamil language created by Agathiyar who could reduce the seven seas to a drop in his palm, as some claim. Others claim, was Tamil not created by Subrahmanya who defeated Soorapadman and saved the devas? Many others claim that it was Siva who burned Thirupuram who created Tamil. Thus our Tamil pandits are happy that Tamil’s glory is selfevident. . . . Whatever be the language, howsoever lowly it is, nobody today will accept that a language is made by one person. Further, let us concede that Sivan indeed made Tamil. What has Tamil gained from that? Was Tamil alone made by god? Then who created the other languages? If all languages are made by god, what does Tamil gain by shouting that Tamil was made by god? If you say that god speaks Tamil does it mean that god does not know other languages? If god wants to speak to others will he still use Tamil? If he speaks to each in his own language what use is it to Tamil that it is god’s language? And if Christians claim that god spoke Hebrew and Muslims that he spoke Arabic how is one to respond?"

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్): Es erscheint:

M. Seshagiri Sastri (சேஷகிரி சாஸ்திரி - Cēṣakiri cāstiri): Essay on Tamil literature. -- Madras : S.P.C.K., 1897. -- 60 S.

"among the majority of the Tamil pandits and others studying Tamil literature there is not much difference between a real history on the one hand and traditions, myths and legends on the other, and Tamil poems are studied and taught with a ready credulousness which has been handed down from generation to generation; and the conservatism imbibed at the feet of the Tamil teachers forms a stronghold too impregnable to all the cannons [sic] of critical and comparative study. Any person who breaks through these ancient barriers of real knowledge has to meet with much opposition, and the war against untruths, falsehoods, absurdities and inconsistencies terminates with little or no success. But when the Western education spreads more and more and turns out scholars who make original researches, and the combined results of the literary researches of these scholars are made accessible to the reading public, we shall hope that false knowledge will disappear before real knowledge."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 152. -- Fair use]

1897-06 - 1914-05

Es erscheint:

The Siddhanta Deepika or The light of truth : a monthly journal devoted to religion, philosophy, literature and science / ed. J. M. Nallaswami Pillai (Tamil நல்லசுவாமி பிள்ளை, 1864 - 1920): -- Online: Internet Archive Search: The Siddhanta Deepika or The light of truth


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్): Es erscheint:

[J. Nallasami Pillai (1864 - 1920]: Ancient Tamilian civilization. -- In: The light of truth or Siddhanta Deepika. -- 1894-10. -- S. 109 - 113. -- Online: Siddhanta Deepika Volume 2 : Editors: J.M.Nallasami Pillai; V.V. Raman : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"If therefore they  [Tamilians] did not come from the north, they  must have formed the aborigines or if they came from outside, where did they come from? If we can forget for a while our prejudice against the word aborigines, and if we can believe in the tradition of there having been a vast continent south of Cape Comorin, whence all humanity and civilization flowed east and west and north, then there can be nothing strange in our regarding the Tamilians as the remnants of a pre-deluvian  race. Even the exiting works in Tamil faintly speak of 3 separate deluges which completely swamped the extreme southern shores and carried off with it all its literary treasures of ages. And it stands to reason why, in South India, unlike in ancient Chaldea and Babylon, none of the old records of the pre-historic civilisation are absolutely not forthcoming. The Palmleaf, the readiest material and the most fragile one which the Tamilians had, must also account for it. However, this theory stands on no historical or scientific footing. And when we remembered that the earliest route known to the Europeans was by the sea and that even in days of King Solomon, there was a brisk trade between his country and Western India, and from what Dr. Caldwell had pointed out there were a number of Tamil words in the Hebrew and when it was known that there were a large number of words common to the Tamil and Assyrian or Sumerian, and what important part the monsoon winds play in the Arabian Gulf, it does not seem improbable to conclude that the first settlers in Western India must have been sailors or merchants coasting along the Arabian Sea who were driven thitherward by adverse-winds and stranded. In this connection, we publish below extracts from the correspondence we bad with the late lamented Professor P. Sundaram Pillai. The argument turned on the fact whether the original of a certain work was Sanscrit or Tamil, and he held that it was the latter against the received tradition and be wrote to say (letter dated 31 st March 1896). [...]"

[a.a.O., S. 11f.]


Es erscheint:

Sabapathy Navalar (1844 - 903): திராவிட பிரகாசிகை : என்னும் தமிழ் வரலாறு - Tirāviṭa pirakācikai: Eṉṉum tamiḻ varalāṟu (The Dravidian light : History of Tamil)

"The very idea of such a work spells originality.   A work of this kind had not existed in Tamil.  At first sight, this would appear to be an encyclopaedia of the standard works of the Tamil language classified into Grammar, Literature and Philosophy, of which Literature is subdivided into Saint's works.  Sangam literature, the kavyas, the puranas, the itihasas and miscellaneous literature.  Each work is given either an introduction or a summary and a critical review.  Looking more closely, one finds the work to be an indispensable guide to the study of Tamil.  It discusses and illumines various conflicting theories, setting its seal of approval on those that stood the test.  Extensive original commentaries also are given for some passages, of which that on the first stanza of Tirukural fills over fifty pages.

In the chapter on the Tamil Language, the author distinguishes letters from sounds, the former as a product of Suddha Maya and the latter as being caused in space. The difference corresponds to that between the form of a body and the light that helps the sensing of the form.  It is also held that letters can be produced only by rational beings, and that other animals converse either by sounds or by signs.  Tamil is said to be divine as it contains divine and inspired writings and as the first Grammarian Agastyar got his knowledge of Grammar by the Grace of God.  There is divinity even in the written form of the letters, the first letter A, having in it the symbol of the Ambika Shakti, which may be differentiated into Vamai, Jyeshtai & Raudri.  Coming to the various interpretations given to the words, Tamil and Thenmozhi [தேன்மொழி], all are rejected except the meaning "sweetness" for the former and "beautiful language" for the letter.

The first work on grammar known to us is that of Sage Agastyar, who was a teacher of Tamil and world-Guru of the Saiva religion.  His grammar spoke of Iyal Tamil, which was literature, of Isai-Tamil [இசை தமிழ்] or Tamil music, and of Natakam [நாடகம்] or the science and art of acting and dancing.  As the Tamil Language is radically different from Samaskritam [சமஸ்க்ரிதம் - Sanskrit], the idea that Agastyar was indebted to some Samaskrita Grammarian is easily exploded.  But his work is practically lost.

His disciple, Tolkappiyer, wrote a grammar which has lived these thousands of years, and bids fair to remain for ever.  He seems to have written only on Iyal Tamil.  But his chapter on Porul [பொருள்] is a rich mine of very valuable information  It treats of the purushartas [Ziele des Menschen], duty, wealth, pleasure and bliss, which one has to attain in one's life.  As the same kind of life cannot suit different types of people, this part of Tholkappiam is based on Geography.

This Geography does not speak of bays and capes, or areas and boundaries, but is real scientific Geography.  It classifies lands into table, lands, forests, grasslands, deserts(Deserts are dry tablelands and sparsely populated regions) and maritime regions.  It gives the fauna and flora of each kind of land, the diet, occupation, worship, amusements, music, and the degree of advancement of the people of the land.  In other words, it had reached the latest advancement in the idea of Geography in the west and Tholkappiar anticipated several thousands of years ago what the western scientist has just attained.  The Ego, the Me and the I, is treated in one part of porul grammar called Ahapporul [அகப்பொருள்] which also portrays religious life, and the Non-Ego including the various branches of political and military sciences is treated in Puraporul.  The author of the Prakasikai devotes nearly fifty pages to this immortal book giving a succinct but clear and thought-provoking account of it.  He also refers to Sivagnana Munivar's wide commentary on the preface and the first sutram of the book.

Coming to Ilakkyam [இலக்கியம்], the author places the twelve groups of religious literature before sangam literature, as some of these were composed earlier and they were sung by sanctified sages.

The author next proves that the works of the saints are equivalent to the Vedas, in as much as saints were illumined by the Arulshakthi [அருள்சக்தி] of God, and their words were therefore as much the embodiment of Arul [அருள்] as the Vedas themselves.  But he objects to the appellation of Arulpa being given to the songs of imperfect seers, and rightly holds it a blasphemy to do so.  While quoting Avvayar's famous Venpa which identifies the substance of Arulpa [அருள்ப] with the Vedas, the interpretation he gives to the term "Munimozhiyum" as "sung my Manikkavachakar" is different from the traditional view.  His chief reason for rejecting the meaning 'Vedanta Sutra" is that the work is not so well-known as a Saiva Shastra to be denoted by a name compounded of two words, each of which is a general name.  The ground of the supporters of the view is that Kovai and Tiruvachakam Tiruvachakam are easily identified without the author's name.

The term Tiruchittambalam uttered at the beginning and close of the Tamil Vedas is identified with the Pranava and is shown to be very comprehensive.  Chit is Gnana and Ambalam means Akasa.  So the term means the space of Gnana, which is the Lotus of the Heart and which includes the thirty-six tatvas and other products of Pranava.  The soul identifying itself in its contemplation with Siva, who resides in the Lotus, finally becomes Advaita with Him, or, in other words, attains Mukti.  The term Tiruchittambalam is thus identical with Pranava but is more sthula and tangible in its form.

The author devotes considerable space to Peria Puranam which he interprets as the Puranam of greatness (of saints).  This work was intended to replace Jivaka-Chintamani Jivaka-Chintamani, the study of which would be waste of time, according to the sacred dictum of Appar [...] But the Puranam is far more than a literary work, embodying the philosophy and practice of religion, devotional songs, varnashrama dharma,  and creeds of other religions.  Chintamani thus pales to insignificance before Periapuranam as a glow-worm before the rays of the midday sun.  The author's commentary on the first stanza of the Puranam is a model exposition showing the need for scientific-thinking and extensive knowledge of religious philosophy in tackling sacred songs of this kind.  Many commentators come in for severe adverse criticism, the merit of which cannot be considered here.

The next important work reviewed by the author is Thirukural, which forms a connecting link between religious literature and sangam literature.  As this work is more ethical than philosophical, it is readily accepted by all religionists, and happens to be the most popular Tamil work in the west, having been translated into many European languages.  The Jains and even Christians claim Thiruvalluvar as their co-religionist.  The Navalar's commentary on the first Kural, which covers fifty-five pages, is a wonderful performance, containing extensive quotations from the Vedas, the Agamas, and the Shastras.  It is the whole Saiva religion in a nutshell, educed from the tiny couplet by the author's massive genius, which has left a true impression on it.

In the Sangam Literature are included Pathu-Pattu Pathu-Pattu, Ettuthokai , and Pathinenkeel-Kanakku.  The so-called five Sanga Kavyas are rightly placed by the author as post-sangam works.  Chintamani was written probably four or five centuries after the dissolution of the Last Sangam.  Kandapuranam [கந்த புராணம்] is placed at the top of Puranic Literature, and here too the author strikes an original note regarding the agglutination of the first pair of words in the Kappu. Whereas the traditional view is that Veerasohium is an authority for it [...], it is contended that the change is authorised by Tholkappier in his Sutram of exceptions and that Buddha Mitranar, whose claim for infallibility cannot be upheld, had no right to make a rule against Tholkappier and against the usage of the Sangam Literature and the works of other great authors.  The only possible justification for him could be the use by Kachiyappar, who then must have preceded the author of Veerasozhium.

In Shastraic Literature are included eighteen kinds of philosophy and science - the Vedas, Vedic-music, Vedic-rituals, Vedic-grammar, Vedic-philosophy, Vedic-prosody, Astronomy, the eighteen Puranas, Logic, Natural and Religious philosophy, Law, Medicine, Military Science, Music and Political Economy. 

Of the six Vedic Shastras which are misnamed "the six systems of philosophy" (They are supplementary and form a single system.  The apparent differences in them are due to narrow views of them) Vaiseshika is treated in Tarka Paripadai of Sivaprakasa Munivar, and Nyaya in Taruka Sangraham of Sivagnana Muniver.  The Vedanta is expounded in many Tamil Works such as Kaivalyam of Thandavamurti and Gnanavasittam of Veerayalavanthar.  Agamic Shastras are classified into those that treat of the first three padas are Sivadharmothara, and Gnana-Shastras like the fourteen Siddhanta Shastras.  A long account is given of Sivagnanabodham.  It is the most authoritative work in Tamil, as it is a translation and exposition of the Sivagnanabodham of the Rourava Agama and is the Gnanasurya that gives light to the whole Tamil Siddhantic Literature.  A very elaborate commentary on this work was written by that illumined intellectual giant, Sivagnana Munivar, in whose sishya line the author of the Prakasikai had the privilege to be.

The concluding chapter of the Prakasikai begins with a section on the importance and value of learning and proceeds to give an account of the right methods of teaching and learning, some of which are yet new to the pedagogic works of the west.  It ends with a course of studies in three progressive grades the last of which includes religious literature and philosophy.

Jaffna,  Sri.S.Shivapadasundaram, B.A.,
13th Chittrai of Prabhava.(1927)"                                                                                                                                 

[Quelle: Sabapathy Navalar ( -- Zugriff am 2021-11-02. -- Fair use]


Tod von Gurazada Srirama Murty (Telugu గురజాడ శ్రీరామమూర్తి - Gurajāḍa śrīrāmamūrti, 1851 - 1891). Verfasser von కవి జీవితములు - Kavi jīvitamulu (Lives of [Telugu] poets). Darin beginnt er mit einem Appell [విజ్ఞాపనము] an తెలుగు దేశ భాష అభిమానులు "those having affection for or pride in the language of the Telugu country"

[Quelle: Mitchell, Lisa (1966 - ): Language, emotion, and politics in South India : The making of a mother tongue. -- Blommington : Indiana U.Pr., 2009. -- 281 S. : Ill. -- S. 11. -- Fair use]


Oxford: Es erscheint:

The Tiruvāçagam : or 'Sacred utterances' of the Tamil poet, saint and sage Māņikka-Vāçagar ; the Tamil text of the fifty-one poems with English translation, introduction and notes ; to which is prefixed a summary of the life and legends of the sage, with appendices illustrating the great South-Indian system of philosophy and religion called The Çaiva Siddhāntam ; with Tamil lexicon and concordance / by G. U. (George Uglow)  Pope [1820 - 1908]. -- Oxford : Clarendon, 1900. -- XCVII + 354 + 84 S. -- Online: The Tiruvacagam; or, 'Sacred utterances' of the Tamil poet, saint, and sage Manikka-Vacagar: the Tamil text of the fifty-one poems, with English translation : Manikkavacakar, 9th cent : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Abb.: Englischsprachiges Titelblatt

Abb.: Tamil Titelblatt

Abb.: Seite 1


It has been repeatedly asked, ‘Of what possible use can the republication, translation, and editing of books like the Tiruvāçagam be?’—and, ‘Who can be expected, to desire to make themselves acquainted with such works?’ This consideration has delayed the publication for some time; and it is not at all to be anticipated that the circulation of the book, at least in Europe, will, for some time to come, be encouraging. Still, this is a work that ought to be done! If the Tamil people and the English are ever in any degree to understand one another, and to appreciate each other’s thoughts and feelings regarding the highest matters; if any progress is to be made in the developement of a real science of Hinduism, as it now is, our English people must have the means of obtaining some insight into the living system which exercises at the present day such a marvellous power over the minds of the great majority of the best Tamil people.

For, under some form or other, Çaivism is the real religion of the South of India, and of North Ceylon; and the Çaiva Siddhānta philosophy has, and deserves to have, far more influence than any other. The fifty-one poems which are here edited, translated, and annotated, are recited daily in all the great Çaiva temples of South India, are on every one’s lips, and are as dear to the hearts of vast multitudes of excellent-people there, as the Psalms of David are to Jews and Christians. The sacred mystic poetry of a people reveals their character and aspirations more truly than even their secular legends and ballads; for sacred hymns are continually sung by the devout of all ages, and both sexes; and all classes of the community are saturated with their influence. The attentive consideration of the system here developed must lead to a sympathetic appreciation of what the hopes, fears, aspirations, and yearnings of the devoutest Hindu minds in the South are, and have been from time immemorial. I have occasionally ventured in notes to go beyond the province of editor and translator, and have criticized many things here and there; yet I feel quite sure that my kind and candid friends in South India will be in no danger of misunderstanding the spirit in which I have written. These are times when in regard to all religious systems thorough rational investigation, searching historical criticism, and a careful candid consideration of the meaning of the symbols by which doctrines are supposed to be expressed, are quite necessary everywhere. The result of this searching, yet reverent, analysis has been and is,—ever more and more,—of the utmost value in the West. Whatever is true will bear the test of the severest scrutiny, though men may feel obliged from time to time to modify the expressions of their belief, and to readjust their most cherished formulas. There is an evolution of religion. Meanwhile, true Divine faith lives on, and grows more vigorously for the conflicts in which it is ever, of necessity, engaged.

It is much to be desired that our friends in South India should recognize this, and consent to enter upon a thorough scientific investigation of the historical foundations of their popular beliefs, the precise import of symbolical expressions, and the practical bearing of every portion of their wonderful ‘ Siddhāntam.’

In matters of religion the greatest hindrance,—and the most truly irreligious thing,—is the spirit of ignorant, unreasoning, unsympathetic antagonism. Every system has its truths and profounder thoughts; and these lie deeper than 'full fathoms five’ in man’s nature; and must be fundamentally and essentially in large measure the same for all men, and for all time. It is only by recognizing these common truths, and making them the basis of inquiry, as to further alleged Divine communications, that it is possible to gain a true religious developement.

Very many things celebrated in these remarkable poems are doubtless without even the shadow of historic foundation, but it is yet possible to feel a lively interest in some, at least, of them as poetic fancies. What seems graceful and touching to one people often excites laughter, or scorn, or even detestation, among others. So, in regard to symbols, it is quite certain that many expressions, figures of speech, and allegories, very dear to peoples in the West, have no significance whatever to those of the East. And very, very much that seems to Oriental minds edifying, is repellent to those of the West. Still, I think the time has really come when thoughtful and candid people may do much to remove the hindrances, that undoubtedly exist, to the closer union of the convictions and sentiments of devout men in East and West. I may add that nothing can be further from my purpose in this work, and more utterly distasteful to me, than theological controversy; and if in this work any one word of mine should give pain to any of my valued Tamil friends, I ask forgiveness in advance.

It seems also most desirable that all Europeans whose lot it is to dwell in the Tamil lands, or who anywhere set themselves to benefit their Tamil fellow-subjects,—and especially missionaries and teachers,—should take pains to know accurately the feelings and convictions of those for whom, and in the midst of whom, they work. For many years I have not ceased to say,—there in India, and here in Oxford,—to successive classes of students,

'You must learn not only to think in Tamil, but also to feel in Tamil, if you are to be intelligible and useful among the Tamil people.’

This publication (the fruit of much weary toil) may help, it is trusted, all who desire to be helped, along this certainly difficult road.

It must be confessed, moreover, that I very earnestly wish also that my valued Tamil friends may be led to make the closer acquaintance of some of the magnificent collections of ‘sacred poetry’ existing in English. And this not only for the benefit (which must be great) of the individual student, but of Tamil literature. For no literature can stand alone.

I may safely take it for granted that my indulgent Tamil friends will not shrink from these Christian compositions, because they are full of the unstinted praises of Him Whom all acknowledge as the noblest, purest, best, and most self-sacrificing of those who have worn the garment of our mortality,—any more than I have shrunk from long and appreciative study of poems containing very much with which I can have but scanty sympathy.

'Scrutinize all things: hold fast that which is good!’

I may add that my experience as a translator has taught me that to get even a glimpse of the thought of a real poet, the student must often go down into the depths, must use every means to put himself in sympathy with his author, must learn to think and feel with him, and so—it may be—at last come to understand him.

Some German and Latin hymns were translated 150 years ago by that wonderful Tamil scholar and poetic genius, the missionary Fabricius; and ' Fabricius' hymn-book ’ [Hymnologien Deutsch-Tamil, 1763] has been, and deserved to be, the basis of nearly all the Christian Tamil hymnology. Though it is hardly classical, it is so vigorous and real in its tone, that it does not seem likely ever to lose its hold upon the affections of the Tamil Christian community. Nevertheless it is to be earnestly desired that the transfusion of much great European and sacred poetry into popular, easy, rhythmic Tamil verse resembling that of Māņikka-Vāçagar, should be attempted. If a foreigner has bestowed infinite pains (would that it had been with greater results!) on the study of the Tiruvāçagam, perhaps some of the native scholars of South India, versed in English and Tamil, may be induced to inquire whether they cannot find fitting material for study, imitation, and translation in that inexhaustible mine of beauty and profound thought which is opened up in English sacred verse, from the Hebrew psalms down to the Christian poetry of the present day. Nothing of this sort can be expected to live and be effective among a people if not expressed in their own vernacular language, the ' vulgar tongue,’ ' in which they were born.’

The speech of a dying people may, perhaps, be allowed to die; but this cannot be said of the Tamil race. Heaven forbid!

Dead languages have great uses. ' Even in their ashes live their wonted fires.’ De mortuis nil nisi bonum !—yet, in many ways, the living tongues are better! One cannot tell what flowers may yet bloom, what fruits may yet ripen, on the hardy old trees. Let Tamilians cease to be ashamed of their vernacular!

There exists now much of what is called Christian Tamil, a dialect created by the Danish missionaries of Tranquebar enriched by generations of Tanjore, German, and other missionaries; modified, purified, and refrigerated by the Swiss Rhenius and the very composite Tinnvelly school; expanded and harmonized by Englishmen, amongst whom Bower (a Eurasian) was foremost in his day; and, finally, waiting now for the touch of some heaven-born genius among the Tamil community to make it as sweet and effective as any language on earth, living or dead.

Of that unique genius Beschi (see Preface to my Kurraļ, for a history of this great man), and of De Nobilibus, and (in after days) of Ellis and Stokes,—with a multitude of others, such as Drew, Caldwell, and Percival, who advanced Tamil culture,— space forbids me here to speak.

Beschi—with his unnamed collaborators —has left what is a literature in itself, but—except certain prose books—tending more and more to become obsolete.                         

There has been at least one real native Christian poet, Vēthanāyaga Sāstriār [வேதநாயகம் சாஸ்திரியார், 1774 - 1864] of Tanjore, whose writings should be collected and edited. Christian lyrics, of unequal value, abound. Mr. Webb, an able American missionary of Madura, did much to develope these. The ‘ Pilgrim’s Progress ’ has been versified; and the first book of ‘ Paradise Lost,’ by V. P. Subramaņia Mudaliār, is a courageous attempt. Many more works might be cited, but this must suffice for Christian Tamil.

Amongst many others, Tirumūlar’s Tirumantra,Tāyumānavar’s poems, Pattaņattu Piļļai’s poems, the Dēvāram, the Tiruvicaipa Tiruviçaipā, with various articles in ‘The Light of Truth,’ by N. B. and by P. A., exhibit at once the capabilities and needs of popular Tamil poetry.

Of old classical Tamil and its stores I have spoken elsewhere.

I am afraid I cannot recall more than two recent works which seem to me to give promise of a veritable re-descent in more modern attire of the Tamil Sarasvatī.

The distinguished author of Manōmaņīyam, P. Suntharam Piļļai, has—too early for us—passed into the unseen. The copy he sent me (inscribed with characteristic modesty), ‘Submitted to —— with the author’s best respects,’ is to me a valued companion.

The little anonymous volume—a first instalment—entitled 'Tani-pāçura-togai’  seems to herald the advent of a new school to be heartily welcomed.

But Tamil—like Latin in the early Christian ages—must learn to adapt herself to the new order of things! Horace and Virgil would hardly have consented to part with their metrical system for the rhythms and rhymes of a later time; yet ‘Dies Irae’ and ‘Veni Spiritus,’ the poems of Richard and Adam of St. Victor, St. Bernard, and a multitude of others, came to dwell in the world’s heart for ever; while Dante and all the great Italians are Latins!

The work of translation was here and there difficult, and I had to compare a great number of similar verses to get at the meaning. An anonymous scholar, who has written the only commentary I know on the Tiruvāçagam, confesses himself at a loss to explain, among others, Poems I-IV. I have altered a few things in accordance with his interpretations, but have often seen reasons for differing. The work is very able and learned.

Generally my translation runs line for line with the original, and preserves something of its rhythm, where this did not interfere with fidelity to the sense.

Of the Tiruvāçagam itself nothing need be added to what is elsewhere said.

My thanks are due to the Secretary of State for India for a liberal subsidy; to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press; and to many Tamil friends (who do not desire their names to be mentioned).

A full list of subscribers and donors will be duly published.

To Mr. Pembrey (as in my former writings) I owe very much for his indefatigable co-operation.

I date this on my eightieth birthday. I find, by reference, that my first Tamil lesson was in 1837. This ends, as I suppose, a long life of devotion to Tamil studies. It is not without deep emotion that I thus bring to a close my life’s literary work.

Some years ago, when this publication was hardly projected, one evening, after prayers, the writer was walking with the late Master of Balliol College in the quadrangle. The conversation turned upon Tamil legends, poetry and philosophy. At length, during a pause in the conversation, the Master said in a quick way peculiar to him, ‘You must print it.’ To this the natural answer was, ‘Master! I have no patent of immortality, and the work would take very long.’ I can see him now, as he turned round,—while the moonlight fell upon his white hair and kindly face,—and laid his hand upon my shoulder, saying, ‘To have a great work in progress is the way to live long. You will live till you finish it.’ I certainly did not think so then, though the words have often come to my mind as a prophecy, encouraging me when weary; and they have been fulfilled, while he has passed out of sight.

To the memory of Benjamin Jowett, one of the kindest, and best, and most forbearing of friends,—to whom I owe, among much else, the opportunity of accomplishing this and other undertakings,—I venture to inscribe this volume with all gratitude and reverence.

May the blessing of his Master and mine crown the very imperfect work!

Balliol College, April 24, 1900."

[a.a.O., S. ix - xiv]


Es erscheint:

D. Savariroyan Pillai (Tamil டி சவரிராயன் பிள்ளை - Ṭi Cavarirāyaṉ Piḷḷai): Some disputed points cleared. -- In.: Light of Truth or Siddanta Deepika.. - 5 (1901). -- S. 78 - 81 ; 194 - 200. -- Online: Siddhanta Deepika Volume 5 : Editors: J.M.Nallasami Pillai, V.V. Raman : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Aus der Antwort an einen Brief von Julien Vinson (1843 - 1926):

"Coming now to the next point, the Professor declares that “Sanskrit was certainly formed.....even before Aryan speaking people had any contact with the Dravidian". Here is a point which seems to me to be in positive contradiction to facts. Before going further, I should like to know whether by Sanskrit language he means the Vedic language or the post-Sanskrit. Whatever he may mean, the Professor's proposition cannot stand. It is an admitted fact that the Vedic language, or the Aryan-primitive, was in a dialectical and uncultured stage when it was first met on the banks of the Indus and that the post-Sanskrit or the Aryan-derivative was developed in India, a long time after its introduction. Does not the Professor admit the fact that the Aryans, on their arrival at the N. W. frontier, found the Dravidians or Tamilians in flourishing communities ? Has it not been, not very long ago, pointed out by philologists that the cerebral sounds, which now abound throughout the Sanskrit Vocabulary, did not originally belong to the Aryan family of languages and was borrowed from the Dravidian tongues ? These facts, if admitted, lead one to naturally conclude that the after-development of the uncultured Vedic-tongue which resulted in Sanskrit was owing to the influence of the highly civilised Dravidian, when the former came into contact with the latter. If such be the case, I should like to know how the Professor would explain that Sanskrit was formed before the Aryans had any contact with the Tamilians, a theory which is contrary to history.

It is quite true as the Professor says that Hindi. Bengali etc. are the living representatives of Sanskrit. But I shall just request the Professor to remark the striking difference between Hindi, Bangali etc., the representatives of Sanskrit, and French, Spanish etc., the representatives of Latin. The difference is markedly shown by Dr. Oppert. (The Original Inhabitants of India page 10).

"This difference,” says he, "is easily observable when we compare on the one hand the construction of Sanskrit with that of such Aryanised languages, as Bangali and Marathi, which possess a considerable substratum of a non-Aryan element, and on the other hand, the construction of Latin with that of the Neo-Latin languages, French and Spanish, which may he considered as entirely Aryan”.

I observe that the basis of formation of the Sanskrit tongue is the same as that of its representatives. “The Phonetics, the Grammatical system, the general features, the derivation of words, and what is called the particular genius” are not, I dare say, quite special to Sanskrit ; in these respects, it agrees more with the Tamilian than with Latin, Greek etc.


The tradition asserts

  1. that there was a great, continent contiguous with South India covering the large portion of the Indian ocean to the South of Cape Comorin and it was the seat of a civilized nation and of a powerful dynasty for many centuries from very remote times;

  2. that the capital of the dynasty was the seat of an assembly of learned men first at South Mathurai [தென் மதுரை], second at Kabadapuram [கபாடபுரம்] or Alavai and the assembly of literati at South Mathurai is known as the First Sangam and that at Kapadapuram as the second and

  3. that there occurred then a great inundation which washed away the vast extent of land stretching from Cape Comorin southwards with all the literary productions of the time.

(1) The fact that a vast land existed south of Cape Comerin and was submerged by the flood receives great support from the modern sciences, Geology and Natural History, which prove the existence of a land south of India and its disappearance beyond the pale of doubt. "The Science of Man” "The Science of Man" (for December, 1900, Australia) says:—

“Ths locality of the origin of the earliest race from the most recent researches appears to have been on lands now submerged beneath the Indian Ocean.”

But centuries before the birth of Natural History and Geology, this old tradition was recorded in the Ancient Tamilian classics. Therefore the Professor is obliged to give credit by all means to this tradition corroborated by modem sciences and discoveries. That the Tamilians even in those early days possessed an extensive literature will strike every one who goes through any extant old commentary of any one of the Tamil classical works. The learning and the knowledge displayed by the commentator, the highly polished and classical fragments of quotations and names of old standard works on grammar, theology, metaphysics, ethics etc. mentioned therein, all go to impress strongly, when compared with the meagre portion that is left to us, the possibility of a vast store of ancient literature displaying considerable erudition and the sense of the loss that Tamil has sustained by a great catastrophe. The lost works of which there seem to have been quite an ocean pass in view before us and remind us of the ancient grandeur and wealth of Tamil. This fact also cannot but be admitted by our Professor."

[a.a.O., S. 194f. ; 198f.]


Es erscheint:

முதலூழி சேந்தன் தனியூர் (Mutalūḻi Cēntaṉ Taṉiyūr [Pseudonym]): Ceṅkōṉṟaraiccelavu. -- 10 S.

"Further, the recovery of the Ettuttokai and the Pattuppattu also fanned the hope that if these lost works could be found, why not others? This accounts for the great excitement over the publication in 1902 of a slim book, not more than ten printed pages long, entitled Cenkonraraiccelavu, which claimed to be some verses of a longer poem of the first academy of antediluvian Tenmaturai [தென்மதுரை]. As one enthusiast wondered,

“It is not clear why such an ancient text with such rich information has been not been mentioned by any of the old commentaries. It reeks of antiquity.”

The author of the poem styled himself “Mutaluli Centan Taniyur” (Chentan who lived in Taniyur [தனியூர்] before the first deluge), and his verses commemorated some of the exploits of his patron, the antediluvian Tamil king Sengon, who ruled the region called Peruvalanatu that stretched between the rivers Kumari and Pahruli, now lost to the ocean. Here is Chidambaranar who, years after the publication of this work, is barely able to contain his excitement over—and his own involvement in—its recovery:

The above said book was discovered by me from some old cudgan [sic] leaves and it was copied out and kept ready for publication with some notes. If it comes out, the oldest civilisation of the Tamilians will be known to everybody. Emperor Sengon . . . maintain[ed] battle ships and fought many battles overseas with the help of his dreadnought. Emperor Sengone was reigning in the submerged land called continent of Lamoria [sic]. His original home was Olinadu which was situated south of Equator, i.e., thousand miles south of present Ceylon. . . . Emperor Sengone conquered lands as far as Tibet and planted his Bull flag on the Himalayas. This was sung in Sengone Taraichelavu. Continent of Lamoria was called Tamilagam [தமிழகம்] by the Tamilians. Many pandits and scientists hold the opinion that the human species first evolved in the Great Indo-African Continent. . . . This large continent is of great importance for being the probable cradle of the human race.

Although the Cenkonraraiccelavu was declared a forgery by the eminent S. Vaiyapuri Pillai in the 1950s, who noted that

“no responsible scholar now takes any serious notice of it,”

this has not deterred Tamil labors of loss from invoking its veracity till this day. The 1981 government film even declared it to be the “world’s first travelogue,” which it details at some length."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 116f. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint:

Monahan, C. H.: A History of the Tamil Language : Review of A History of the Tamil Language, by V. K. Suryanarayana Sastri. -- In: Madras Christian College Magazine 21 (1903/04)

"In a scathing review of Suryanarayana Sastri’s [வி. கோ. சூரியநாராயண சாஸ்திரியார, 1870 - 1903] Tamilmoliyin Varalaru [தமிழ்மொழியின் வரலாறு] (which, to recall, was the first sustained effort to link the metropolitan paleo-scientist’s Lemuria with a submerged Tamil home-place called Kumarinatu [குமரிநாடு]), published shortly after the book appeared in 1903, the Reverend C. H. Monahan took the influential Tamil scholar-devotee to task for not abiding “by the principles of scientific philology.” Instead,

he allows an amount of weight to mythological elements which renders his judgement on the antiquity of Tamil to my mind almost worthless. He practically accepts the story dear to some Tamilians that in ancient times land extended south of Cape Comorin for some 7,000 miles (!), which was divided into 49 Tamil countries. In this land were South Madura and other places where Tamil flourished. This country now submerged by the Indian Ocean was the cradle of the human race, and its language was Tamil(!). Haeckel is quoted as authority for this opinion. All this is a sore tax on one’s power of belief. But one fairly gasps when one reads the following . . . :

“The Indian Ocean contains 25,000,000 square miles. From this it follows that it is somewhat less than 1,600,000 miles long and 1,600, 000 miles broad(!). Accordingly of this 1,600,000 miles length, 7,000 miles of land must have been swept away by the sea(!!!).”

One would have supposed the numbers to be due to a mere slip of the pen but for the serious argument based upon them. Moreover, we are informed that the Early Tamil Academy lasted 4,440 years and the Middle Academy 3,700. These geographical and historical(?) marvels come of abandoning scientific research for mythology."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 223f. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Tod von Parithimar Kalaignar (Tamil பரிதிமாற் கலைஞர் - Paritimāṟ kalaiñar, 1870 - 1903)

Abb.: Briefmarke, 2007
[Wikimedia / GODL]

V. G. Suryanarayana Sastri (வி. கோ. சூரியநாராயண சாஸ்திரியார்)
Born 6 July 1870
Vilacheri near ThirupparankundramMadura DistrictBritish India
Died 2 November 1903 (aged 33)
Madras, British India
Pen name Parithimar Kalaignar, Dravida Sastri
Occupation Tamil pundit
Language Tamil

Verfasste 1898 die erste einheimische Geschichte des Tamil auf Grundlage der europäischen vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft:

தமிழ்மொழியின் வரலாறு - Tamiḻmoḻiyiṉ varalāṟu (History of the Tamil language)

"Similarly, V. G. Suryanarayana Sastri, a novelist and essayist who in 1902 was the first devotee to vehemently demand recognition of Tamil’s “classical” status, is much praised. Brahman he may nominally have been, but in his தமிழ்மொழியின் வரலாறு [History of the Tamil language] (1903), Suryanarayana Sastri offered a spirited defense of the autonomy, originality, and uniqueness of Tamil, refusing to subordinate the language to Sanskrit in any realm.

Suryanarayanan was born into an orthodox Smarta Brahman family of Vilacceri near Madurai in 1870. His father was a scholar of Sanskrit, and Suryanarayanan formally studied the language from his early youth. It was not until he went to high school, however, that his love for Tamil was really kindled, and by the time he was twenty, he was learned enough to start writing literary pieces. In 1890, he moved to Madras for his college education, and he graduated with top honors. Although he could have had any job for the asking, as a true devotee of Tamil he chose to become a Tamil pandit, low salary and all, at Madras Christian College. Over the next decade, he became renowned not just for his mastery of literary Tamil but also for his attempts to introduce innovative ideas, from English literature, into Tamil prose, plays, and poetry. Yet he never let his admiration for English compromise his love for Tamil: indeed, his fellow devout recall with delight that as a student, when challenged by one of his English professors, he had declared that Kamban’s verse from centuries before was superior to Tennyson’s. Not surprisingly, for all his work he won the admiration of the famed scholar and fellow devotee Damodaram Pillai, who bestowed upon him the title tiravita castiri [திராவிட சாஸ்திரி], “Dravidian Brahman scholar,” a title which even in those days already appeared oxymoronic (N. Subramanian 1950). And he became a close associate of another Tamil litterateur and fellow devotee, M. S. Purnalingam Pillai, whose journal, Nanapotini, he helped co-edit and who declared, when Suryanarayanan died young at thirty-three in 1903, that he had become a “martyr to Tamil” (Purnalingam Pillai 1985: 347).

Suryanarayanan’s reputation as Tamil adherent also rests on a singular act that has elicited much admiration from successive generations of the devout. In 1899, in an anthology in which he attempted to introduce the sonnet into Tamil poetry for the first time, he adopted the pen name “Paritimal Kalainar [பரிதிமாற் கலைஞர],” the pure Tamil rendering of his own given (Sanskritic) name. In his preface to the text, he was clear about why he did this; he was worried about his innovation and was keen on getting his fellow scholars’ frank criticisms of his attempt. The work went on to elicit much enthusiasm, and its second edition was published with its author’s Sanskritic name (N. Subramanian 1950: 81-84). Although he was hailed as a founder of the taṉittamiḻ [தனித்தமிழ் - pure Tamil]  movement by some later devotees, his critics fault him for using his pure Tamil name only once; they also point out that his plays and novels featured characters bearing Sanskritic names, and his own Tamil was inflected with Sanskrit (Tirumaran 1992: 118-23)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 199f.. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్): Es erscheint:

M. S. Purnalingam Pillai (Tamil மு. சி. பூரணலிங்கம் பிள்ளை - Mu. Ci. Pūraṇaliṅkam Piḷḷai, 1866 - 1947): A primer of Tamil literature. -- Madras : Ananda, 1904. -- 218 S. -- Online: A Primer of Tamil Literature : Purnalingam Pillai, M. S., 1866- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Up to 100 A. D.

1. Introduction.—Three Sangams or Academies are alleged to have existed in the Tamil country at three different periods doing the work of literary censors. According to Nakkirar’s commentary on Irayanar’s Ahapporul where the first account of these colleges of poets occurs, the three Sangams held their sessions at the Madura in ruins, Kapadapuram, and in the modern Madura respectively, dragged on their existence for about ten thousand years, presided over by one hundred and ninety-seven kings, consisted of no fewer than six hundred and fifty seven syndics, and sat in judgment on the literary productions of nearly eight thousand and seven hundred poets. This account found favour with Nacchinarkinyar who gave currency to it in his commentary on Tholkappiyam, and it was repeated by Adiarkunallar when he commented on Silappathikaram. In this way it has been handed down to modern times. But now it is challenged by critical scholars, both Indian and European, on the ground that it is full of improbabilities and inconsistencies and draws too much on the marvellous as it gives an incredible longevity to each poet and prince who had anything to do with the Sangams. They believe that these Academies must have been the figments of some poetic imagination akin to that of Vallala Senan in his Bhoja Prabandam, where Sanskrit poets of totally different times—Kalidasa, Bharavi, Mahan, Bhavabhuti, Bhana, Thandi, and others—are made to assemble in the Court of King Bhoja and to pour forth panegyrics on his devoted head.

“ It is of course open to doubt,’’ wrote Professor Sundaram Pillai, “whether there ever existed a regularly constituted body of pundits and poets, which may be called a College in our modern sense of the word ; but that a number of brilliant men of genius rose and flourished soon after the memorable victory of Thalai Alankanam, and at intervals from one another so short that in the perspective of posterity they appear to have formed but one grand galaxy — one single group or College—it would be the height of scepticism to question.”

But the question of their existence cannot be easily decided until the researches of the archaeological society in South India bring to light facts and materials enough to explain away the apparent improbabilities and contradictions. Till then the commentators’ account will bear sway and must be accepted cum grano salis. The following venba [வெண்பா] of the Sangam age gives the number of the syndics and poets of each Sangam."

[a.a.O., S. 8f.]


London: Es erscheint:

William Scott-Elliot (1849 - 1919): The lost Lemuria. -- London : Theosophical Publishing Society, 1904. -- 44 S. "With two maps showing distribution of laNd areas at different periods.". -- Online: The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Story of Atlantis and the Lost Lemuria, by W. Scott-Elliot


The object of this paper is not so much to bring forward new and startling information about the lost continent of Lemuria and its inhabitants, as to establish by the evidence obtainable from geology and from the study of the relative distribution of living and extinct animals and plants, as well as from the observed processes of physical evolution in the lower kingdoms, the facts stated in the "Secret Doctrine" and in other works with reference to these now submerged lands."

Abb.: Map no. 1: Lemuria at its greatest extent

Abb.: Map no. 2: Lemuria at a later period


Es erscheint:

Rudolf Steiner (1861 - 1925): Die Lemurische Rasse. -- In: Lucifer-Gnosis <Berlin>. -- Wieder abgedruckt in Aus der Akasha-Chronik : Rudolf Steiner : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- S. 57 - 73


Hier wird ein Stück aus der Akasha-Chronik mitgeteilt, das sich auf eine sehr ferne Urzeit in der Menschheitsentwickelung bezieht. Diese Zeit geht derjenigen voraus, welche in den vorhergehenden Darstellungen geschildert worden ist. Es handelt sich um die dritte menschliche Wurzelrasse, von welcher in theosophischen Büchern gesagt wird, daß sie den lemurischen Kontinent bewohnt hat. Dieser Kontinent lag — im Sinne dieser Bücher — im Süden von Asien, dehnte sich aber ungefähr von Ceylon bis Madagaskar aus. Auch das heutige südliche Asien und Teile von Afrika gehörten zu ihm. — Wenn auch beim Entziffern der „Akasha-Chronik“ alle mögliche Sorgfalt angewendet worden ist, so muß doch betont werden, daß nirgends für diese Mitteilungen irgendwelcher dogmatischer Charakter in Anspruch genommen werden soll. Ist schon das Lesen von Dingen und Ereignissen, welche dem gegenwärtigen Zeitalter so fernliegen, nicht leicht, so bietet die Übersetzung des Geschauten und Entzifferten in die gegenwärtige Sprache fast unübersteigliche Hindernisse. — Zeitangaben werden später gemacht werden. Sie werden besser verstanden werden, wenn die ganze lemurische Zeit und auch noch diejenige unserer (fünften) Wurzelrasse bis zur Gegenwart durchgenommen sein werden. — Die Dinge, die hier mitgeteilt werden, sind auch für den Okkultisten, der sie zum ersten Male liest, überraschend — obgleich das Wort nicht ganz zutreffend ist. Deshalb darf er sie nur nach der sorgfältigsten Prüfung mitteilen."

[a.a.O., S. 57]


Linguistic Survey of India (1906), Sten Konow (1867 - 1948), Edward Albert Gait (1863 - 1950), George Abraham Grierson (1851 - 1941), zur Drawidenfrage:

"The authoritative Linguistic Survey of India (1903-28) barely hints at Lemuria in its volume on the Dravidian and Munda languages:

“With regard to the Dravidas, some authorities believe that they arrived in India from the south, while others suppose them to have entered it from the north-west” (Grierson 1906, 5).

Sten Konow, the Sanskritist who edited this volume doubted that Dravidians were the original inhabitants of the subcontinent, noting in a letter to George Grierson, the director of the project, that,

 “I do not think that the present distribution of Mundas and Dravidas affords any clue as to which of them first came to India. But I think that such a clue is furnished by the fact that the Mundas are connected with those tribes which must be supposed to be the oldest inhabitants of Further India” (India Office Library, Grierson Papers, S/1/1/7, letter dated March 4, 1904).

In response to this claim, Edward Gait, the then-Census Commissioner retorted,

“The Dravidians (the race) are I believe generally regarded as the oldest inhabitants of India: they are allied to the African Negro and probably came from the south by way of the submerged continent of Lemuria” (India Office Library, Grierson Papers, S/1/1/7, letter dated March 17, 1904).

Grierson himself was remarkably reticent on this issue, only noting in passing after commenting on the profusion of languages in the subcontinent that,

“Over all, there broods the glamour of eastern mystery. Through all of them we hear the inarticulate murmur of past ages, of ages when the Aryans wandered with their herds across the steppes of Central Asia, when the Indo-Chinese had not yet issued from their home on the Tang-tse-Kiang, and perhaps when there existed the Lemurian continent where now sweep the restless waves of the Indian ocean” (Grierson 1903, 342)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 266, Anm. 21. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint:

J. M. Nallaswami Pillai (Tamil நல்லசுவாமி பிள்ளை - Nallacuvāmi piḷḷai, 1864 - 1920): Ourselves. -- In The Light of Truth, or Siddhanta Deepika 7, S. 25 -31. -- Online: Siddhanta Deepika Volume 7 : Editors: J.M.Nallasami Pillai, V.V. Raman : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive


We had set forth our high aims in our first number in the following words .—

“Our Journal will devote itself to bring out translation of rare works in Sanskrit and Tamil, both literary and philosophical and religious, will devote its pages to a more critical and historical study of Indian Religious Systems, to develop a taste for and to induce a proper and more appreciative cultivation of our Indian Classical and Vernacular Languages and Literature, to bring into the Tamil all that is best and noblest in the literature and the philosophy of the West, to supply to it its deficiency in the field of science and history, ancient and modern. Greater attention will be paid to the language and the history of South India, and the Dravidian philosophy and religion will find their best exposition in its pages; and in this respect, it is intended to supply a real and absolutely important want. Being fully aware of the fact what a small minority we will be addressing if our Magazine be conducted wholly in English and being aware that no real improvement in the condition of the people can be effected except by means of their own vernacular and being anxious to preserve to them this much at least of their natural birthright, the love of their own language, we have resolved to bring out a Tamil edition of the Magazine to extend its usefulness among all classes of the South Indian Community and to impart to them the benefits of Western research and knowledge and to infuse into them corrector notions of science and history and scientific and historical criticism.’’

"In regard to its policy, it is intended to conduct the Journal on the broadest and most innocuous lines consistent with the objects of the Magazine as above set forth. It is needless to observe that we shall religiously eschew all politics, and the only politics shall be, if ever there be any occasion, to appeal to the innate loyalty of every Indian, bound up as it is with his deeply rooted religions instinct, which cannot leave him even in his bitterest extremes. In social matters, we are fully alive to the manifold evils (adyatmikam, adiboudhikam, adidaivikam) existing in our society, we are positively convinced also that caste and custom overrides all determinations of science and religion and real piety, and we will not be afraid to speak truth in the plainest terms. But let not the orthodox stare and frown. We can be really as conservative in our heart and deed and we will lose nothing by giving up or gradually changing some of our pernicious and useless customs. We will assure them, however, that we will strictly guard their religion and sentiment and the preservation of their own habits and manners if they are not positively harmful. Nothing will be done to wound any body’s feelings unnecessarily and we will take care, however, not to Sacrifice scientific truth and honest conviction to mere absurd sentiment. We honour the past and we appreciate the present phase of our existence, at the same time. We feel it our duty to love our country and our people and our religion ; and at the same time we will not be blind to the excellence in the character of other nations and other religions. Let the Grace of God and the good will of our fellow-beings speed our wish and work.” And we may be pardoned if we congratulate ourselves on having achieved some measure of success in all these directions. In fact, the appearance of this magazine was synchronous with an increased and critical study of the Tamil language and literature and a deeper study of the religions of India. Stimulated chiefly by the Theosophical Society, there were any number of magazines and journals devoted to the study of Sanscrit and the exposition of the Vedanta Philosophy, which at best contained only an one-sided view of the Indian people and their beliefs. And many had felt the want and expressed a wish whether there was ever going to be a journal in English devoted to the study of Tamil Literature and Philosophy. Even with our ears, we have heard our Indian friends ask whether there was any philosophy in the Tamil language and literature, and. with the exception of a very few scholars, none of the European scholars knew anything about it, and much less cared to find out for themselves. A European missionary gentleman wrote to us from England to say that he repeatedly pressed on Professor Max Müller and Monier-Williams and others the claims of Tamil Literature and Philosophy but that they had turned a deaf ear to his prayers. He complained that great injustice was done to Tamil but hoped there would come a day when full justice would be done to its great merits and excellence. And it must be a source of considerable satisfaction to our friend that in his own lifetime the justice which he demanded was fully rendered by those very people who denied it at first. And it must be news to many that the conversion of such a veteran Sanscrit scholar as the late Professor Max Müller was all due to the tiny efforts of this magazine. The proprietors and editors of this journal were altogether unknown to the late Professor and they had never intruded on his notice except by sending him copies of this journal. We learnt casualiy from an Indian Civil Servant who met him in Oxford that the Professor was exercising his mind as to the particular features of this magazine, and that he made enquiries as to the persons who were conducting it. And it was with pleasurable feelings that we read the concluding paragraphs in his last great work on the Six Systems of Indian Philosophy which we extract below:—

“It is feared, however, that even this small remnant of philosophical learning will vanish in one or two generations, as the youths of the present day, even if belonging to orthodox Brahmanic families, do not take to these studies, as there is no encouragement.

But, though we may regret that the ancient method of philosophical study is dying out in India, we should welcome all the more a new class of native students who, after studying the history of European philosophy, have devoted themselves to the honorable task of making their own national philosophy better known to the world at large. I hope that my book may prove useful to them by showing them in what direction they may best assist us in our attempts to secure a place to thinkers such as Kapila and Badarayana by the side of the leading philosophers of Greece, Rome, Germany, France, Italy and England. In some cases, the enthusiasm of native students may seem to have carried too far, and a mixing up of philosophical with religious and theosophic propaganda, inevitable as it is said to be in India, is always dangerous. But such Journals as the Pundit, the Brahmavadin, THE LIGHT OF TRUTH and lately the Journal of the Buddhist Text Society, have been doing most valuable service. What we want are texts and translations, and any information that can throw light on the chronology of Indian Philosophy. Nor should their labour be restricted to Sanscrit texts. In the South of India, there exists a philosophical literature which, though it may show clear traces of Sanscrit influence, contains also original indigenous elements of great beauty and of great importance for historical purposes. Unfortunately, few scholars only have taken up, as yet, to the study of the Dravidian language and literature, but young students who complain that there is nothing left to do in Sanscrit literature, would, I believe, find their labours amply rewarded in that field.”

It will be noticed with what few other magazines this magazine is coupled; and how this journal has all through kept in view the importance of translations and retained its own independence, avoiding the snares and pitfalls referred to by the learned professor. We never hoped that he would in a moment forget his life-long partiality for Sanscrit, but we consider it a great gain that he should acknowledge the presence of original indigenous elements of great beauty and of great importance in the South Indian Philosophical Literature, and that with almost his dying breath, he should recommend to his students the study of the same and should tell them that their labours will be amply rewarded in this new field.

To recount the work we have done, a very large number of articles have appeared in its pages dealing with the Tamil literature, and language and philology and the age of several classical writers. The transition into English of two such colossal works as the Sivagnana Siddhiar and Sri Kanta Bashya have been accomplished, the latter nearing its completion almost; not to say of portions of Tirumantra and of a large number of hymns from the Devaram, Tayumanavar &c. A full exposition of the Siddhanta Philosophy has been given, and earnest students of every creed and religion have sought for knowledge and information in its pages and they have always found matters for greater agreement than difference and for more mutual appreciation than recrimination. And we are glad to know that the Saiva Siddhanta Philosophy is more widely known and much better appreciated than a decade ago. Following up our first article on the ancient Tamilian civilization, Pandit D. Savariroyan and his friends have opened up a dark page of South India’s past and great credit is due to them for carrying on their work, undeterred by the unreasoning opposition and prejudices of a large number. And we have heard it—that we have lost the sympathy of a few of our well-wishers and friends by permitting the publication of such articles. But we will appeal to their sense of justice and fairness for once. Did we not all read in our schooldays that the Tamilians were aborigines and savages, that they belonged to a dark race, a Turanian one, whom the mighty civilizing Aryans conquered and called Dasyus, and that all their religion, language and arts were copied from the noble Aryan. Even a few years ago. a great man from our sister Presidency held forth to a learned Madras audience how every evil in our society, whether moral, social or religious, was all due to the admixture of the civilized Aryan with the barbarous Tamilian. How much of this was true and how much of it did we relish and how much of it we did not ? We hope it is well-known now how recent researches of European Ethnologists and Linguists have exploded the postulates of Professor Max Muller and others who gave currency to the distinction of Turanians and Aryans, and how several tests of language and features have been found to be fallacious, and how, even in regard to all the tests, the Tamil race and language have stood as high as possible. The results are not yet definite, and more light is being thrown almost every day. This being so, can we not permit our Pandit and his friends to have their say and give them a good hearing ? All that we have got to do is to hear their facts, and to judge whether their inferences are sound. As it is, we know the Pandit has already a very large following among the Tamil public who fully appreciate his work. As the interest of science is alone concerned, it is absurd to take offence, where none was meant.

We trust therefore that our old friends and well-wishers will give us once more their strong support so that the old work may be carried on with renewed life and vigor.



Oxford: Tod von George_Uglow_Pope (1820 - 1908)

"And there was George Pope (1820-1908), beloved among Tamil’s enthusiasts for translating into English their most revered texts, the Tirukkural and the Tiruvacakam. Late in his life, Pope recalled a conversation he had with a “native friend in South India.” He reportedly said to him:

“I am going to live for Tamil. It shall be my great study; your people shall be my people; and I hope that my God will be theirs.’ The friend replied: ‘Sir, that is very delightful; but it means for you contempt and poverty.”

Tamil’s devout mention with delight that although he himself had declared that

“Tamil scholarship is the direct road to poverty,” Pope dedicated his entire life to the “service of Tamil” (Sethu Pillai 1964: 11).

Born in Nova Scotia in 1820, Pope and his family emigrated to England, where at fourteen he resolved to become a missionary. He set sail for India in 1838, reportedly studying Tamil for the first time on his eight-month voyage over. He became so good at it that he preached his first sermon in Tamil upon landing in Madras. Attached at first to the Wesleyan Missionary Society, he later joined the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. His base of operations was Sawyerpuram in Tirunelveli district, where he founded a seminary. Around 1850, now married, Pope moved to Tanjavur; there, under the tutelage of the Tamil poet and fellow Christian Vedanayaka Sastri (1774-1864), he immersed himself in the study of ancient Tamil literature. This was also the most productive of his years in India, when he wrote a number of Tamil handbooks, textbooks, and dictionaries. After stints in Ootacumand and Bangalore, he returned to England in 1880 and joined Oxford University in 1884, where he taught Tamil and Telugu. It is then that he published his translations of the Tirukkural (1886), the Nālaṭiyār (1893), a partial translation of the Manimekalai (1900), and, most important, the Tiruvacakam (1900). With great enthusiasm, an admirer, Saravana Pillai, greeted Pope’s translation of the Tiruvacakam:

Who is that great scholar who rendered into faultless English our divine Tamil Veda's truths in such a manner that even those who do not know the glorious Tamil may understand?
Born as jewel of the English land,
He has with affection embraced our precious
Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] as his foster mother.
He is a worthy Christian preceptor.
He is the notable who bears the name Pope

(quoted in Sethu Pillai 1964: 18)

Although Pope did not die in the Tamil country nor is he buried there, Tamil enthusiasts mention with satisfaction that he had insisted that his epitaph should bear the phrase tamil manavan [தமிழ் மாணவன்], “student of Tamil.”"

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 193f. -- Fair use]


Seattle: Es erscheint

Max Heindel (1865 - 1919): The Rosicrucian Cosmo-Conception ; or, Christian occult science : an elementary treatise upon man's past evolution, present constitution and future development. -- Seattle: Rosicrucian Fellowship, 1909. --- 536 S. : Ill. -- Online: The Rosicrucian cosmo-conception; or, Christian occult science, an elementary treatise upon man's past evolution, present constitution and future development : Heindel, Max, 1865-1919 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Abb.: Titelblatt

Seine Lehre über Lemuria unterscheidet sich sehr von der tamilischen Auffassung von Lemuria/Kumarikkandam [Tamil குமரிக்கண்டம்]:

"The Lemurian Race.

We are now in a position to understand the information which is to follow concerning the people who lived in the latter part of the Lemurian Epoch, whom we may call the Lemurian Race.

The atmosphere of Lemuria was still very dense—somewhat like the fire-fog of the Moon Period, but denser. The crust of the Earth was just starting to become quite hard and solid in some places, while in others it was still fiery, and between islands of crust was a sea of boiling, seething water. Volcanic outbursts and cataclysms marked this time when the nether fires fought hard against the formation of the encircling wall which was to imprison them.

Upon the harder and comparatively cool spots man lived surrounded by giant fern-forests and animals of enormous size. The forms of both man and animal were yet quite plastic. The skeleton had formed, but man himself had great power in molding the flesh of his own body and that of the animals about him.

When he was born he could hear and feel, but his perception of light came later. We have analogous cases in animals like cats and dogs, the young of which receive the sense of sight some time after birth. The Lemurian had no eyes. He had two sensitive spots which were affected by the light of the Sun as it shone dimly through the fiery atmosphere of ancient Lemuria, but it was not until nearly the close of the Atlantean Epoch that he had sight as we have it today. Up to that time the building of the eye was in progress. While the Sun was within—while the Earth formed part of the light-giving mass—man needed no external illuminant; he was luminous himself. But when the dark Earth was separated from the Sun it became necessary that the light should be perceived, therefore as the light-rays impinged upon man, he perceived them. Nature built the eye as a light-perceiver, in response to the demand of the already-existing function, which is invariably the case, as Professor Huxley has so ably shown. The amoeba has no stomach, yet it digests. It is all stomach. The necessity for digesting food built the stomach in the course of time, but digestion took place before the alimentary canal was formed. In an analogous manner, the perception of light called forth the eye. The light itself built the eye and maintains it. Where there is no light there can be no eye. In cases where animals have withdrawn and dwelt in caves—keeping away from the light—the eyes have degenerated and atrophied because there were no light rays to maintain them and no eyes were needed in the dark caves. The Lemurian needed eyes; he had a perception of light, and the light was commencing to build the eye in response to his demand.

His language consisted of sounds like those of Nature. The sighing of the wind in the immense forests which grew in great luxuriance in that super-tropical climate, the rippling of the brook, the howling of the tempest—for Lemuria was storm-swept—the thunder of the waterfall, the roar of the volcano—all these were to him voices of the Gods from whom he knew himself to have descended.

Of the birth of his body he knew nothing. He could not see either it or anything else, but he did perceive his fellow-beings. It was, however, an inner perception, like our perception of persons and things in dreams, but with this very important difference, that his dream-perception was clear and rational.

Thus he knew nothing at all about his body, in fact he did not even know he had a body any more than we know we have a stomach when that organ is in good health. We remember its existence only when our abuse of it causes us to feel pain there. Under normal conditions we are entirely unconscious of its processes. Similarly did the body of the Lemurian serve him excellently, although he was unaware of its existence. Pain was the means of making him aware of his body and of the world without.

Everything in connection with the propagation of the race and the bringing to birth was done by direction of the Angels under the leadership of Jehovah, the Regent of the Moon. The propagative function was performed at stated times of the year when the lines of force, running from planet to planet, were focussed at proper angles. Thus the creative force encountered no obstruction and parturition was painless. Man was unaware of birth, because at that time he was as unconscious of the physical world as he now is during sleep. It was only in the intimate contact of sex relation that the spirit became aware of the flesh and the man “knew” his wife. That is shown in such passages of the Bible as “Adam knew Eve and she bore Seth”; “Elkanah knew Hannah and she bore Samuel”; and Mary’s question, “How shall I conceive, seeing I know no man?” This is also the key to the meaning of the “Tree of Knowledge,” the fruit of which opened the eyes of Adam and Eve, so that they came to know both good and evil. Previously they had known only good, but when they began to exercise the creative function independently, they were ignorant of stellar influences, as are their descendants, and Jehovah’s supposed curse was not a curse at all, but a simple statement of the result which must inevitably follow use of the generative force which failed to take into consideration the effect of the stellar rays on childbirth.

Thus the ignorant use of the generative force is primarily responsible for pain, sickness and sorrow.

The Lemurian knew no death because when, in the course of long ages, his body dropped away, he entered another, quite unconscious of the change. His consciousness was not focussed in the physical world, therefore the laying aside of one body and the taking of another was no more to him than a leaf or twig drying and falling away from the tree and being replaced by a new growth.

Their language was to the Lemurians something holy. It was not a dead language like ours—a mere orderly arrangement of sounds. Each sound uttered by the Lemurian had power over his fellow-beings, over the animals and even over nature around him. Therefore, under the guidance of the Lords of Venus, who were the messengers of God—the emissaries of the creative hierarchies—the power of speech was used with great reverence, as something most holy.

The education of the boys differed greatly from that of the girls. The Lemurian methods of education seem shocking to our more refined sensibilities. In order to spare the reader’s feelings, only the least cruel of them will be touched upon. Strenuous in the extreme as they may seem, it must be remembered that the Lemurian body was not nearly so high-strung as are the human bodies of the present day; also that it was only by the very harshest measures that the exceedingly dim consciousness could be touched at all. As time went on and the consciousness became more and more awakened, such extreme measures as those used then became unnecessary and have passed away, but at that time they were indispensable to arouse the slumbering forces of the spirit to a consciousness of the outside world.

The education of the boys was designed especially to develop the quality of Will. They were made to fight one another, and these fights were extremely brutal. They were impaled upon spits, with full power to release themselves, but by exercising the will-power they were to remain there in spite of the pain. They learned to make their muscles tense, and to carry immense burdens by the exercise of the Will.

The education of the girls was intended to promote the development of the imaginative faculty. They also were subjected to strenuous and severe treatment. They were put out in the great forests, to let the sound of the wind in the tree-tops speak to them and to listen to the furious outbursts of flood and tempest. They thus learned to have no fear of those paroxysms of nature and to perceive only the grandeur of the warring elements. The frequent volcanic outbursts were greatly valued as a means of education, being particularly conducive to the awakening of the faculty of memory.

Such educational methods would be entirely out of the question at the present day, but they did not make the Lemurian morbid, because he had no memory. No matter what painful or terrifying experiences he endured, everything was forgotten as soon as past. The above-mentioned strenuous experiences were for the purpose of developing memory, to imprint these violent and constantly-repeated impacts from without upon the brain, because memory is necessary that the experiences of the past may be used as guides to Action.

The education of the girls developed the first germinal, flickering memory. The first idea of Good and Evil was formulated by them because of their experiences, which worked chiefly on the imagination. Those experiences most likely to leave a recollection were thought “Good;” those which did not produce that much-desired result were considered “Evil.”

Thus woman became the pioneer in culture, being the first to develop the idea of “a good life,” of which she became the esteemed exponent among the ancients and in that respect she has nobly led the vanguard ever since. Of course, as all Egos incarnate alternately as male and female, there is really no pre-eminence. It is simply that those who for the time being are in a dense body of the feminine gender have a positive vital body, and are therefore more responsive to spiritual impacts than when the vital body is negative as in the male.

As we have seen, the Lemurian was a born magician. He felt himself a descendant of the Gods, a spiritual being ; therefore his line of advancement was by gaining not spiritual, but material knowledge. The Temples of Initiation for the most advanced did not need to reveal to man his high origin ; to educate him to perform feats of magic ; to instruct him how to function in the desire world and the higher realms. Such instruction is necessary today because now the average man has no knowledge of the spiritual world, nor can he function in superphysical realms. The Lemurian, however, in his own way, did possess that knowledge and could exercise those faculties, but on the other hand, he was ignorant of the Laws of the Cosmos and of facts regarding the physical world which are matters of common, everyday knowledge with us. Therefore at the School of Initiation he was taught art, the laws of Nature and facts relating to the physical universe. His will was strengthened and his imagination and memory wakened so that he could correlate experiences and devise ways and means of action when his past experiences did not serve to indicate a proper course of procedure. Thus the Temples of Initiation in the Lemurian times were High Schools for the cultivation of Will-power and Imagination, with “post-graduate courses” in Art and Science.

Yet, though the Lemurian was a born magician, he never misused his powers because he felt himself related to the Gods. Under the direction of the Messengers of the Gods, already spoken of, his forces were directed toward the molding of forms in the animal and the plant worlds. It may be hard for the materialist to understand how he could do such work if he could not see the world about him. It is true man could not “see” as we understand the term and as he now sees objects outside in space with his physical eyes. Still, as the purest of our children are clairvoyant to this day while they remain in a state of sinless innocence, so the Lemurians, who were yet pure and innocent, possessed an internal perception which gave them only a dim idea of the outward shape of any object, but illumined so much the brighter its inner nature, its soul-quality, by a spiritual apperception born of innocent purity.

Innocence, however, is not synonymous with Virtue. Innocence is the child of Ignorance and could not be maintained in a universe where the purpose of evolution is the acquisition of Wisdom. To attain that end, a knowledge of good and evil, right and wrong, is essential, also choice of action.

If, having knowledge and choice, man ranges himself on the side of Good and Right he cultivates Virtue and Wisdom. If he succumbs to temptation and does wrong knowingly, he fosters vice.

God’s plan is not to be brought to naught, however. Every act is a seed-ground for the law of Consequence. We reap what we sow. The weeds of wrong action bear flowers of sorrow and suffering, and when the seeds from them have fallen into a chastened heart, when they have been watered by the tears of repentance Virtue will eventually blossom forth. What blessed assurance, that out of every evil we do, Good will eventually accrue, for in our Father’s Kingdom naught but Good can endure.

Therefore the “Fall” with its consequent pain and suffering is but a temporary state where we see through a glass darkly, but anon we shall behold again face to face the God within and without who is ever perceived by the pure in heart."

[a.a.O., S. 275 - 282]


Es erscheint auf Telugu :

ఆంధ్రుల చరిత్రము - Āndhrula caritramu (History of the Andhras)

"In 1910. the editor of the Vignana Chandrika Mandali [విజ్ఞాన చంద్రికా మండలి], in the preface to Andhrula Charitramu [History of the Andhras], observed:

The Andhras had a glorious past. Without a knowledge of history and presuming that the Andhras were never glorious, some have been spreading a theory that the Andhras are the descendants of the Marathas, with the hope that this would increase Andhras' prestige. The present work will show that we [The Andhras] need not shine on borrowed plumes, that it might be that the Marathas are the descendants of Andhras and not otherwise and that, in days gone by, the Andhras were not behind any other people in India in the extent of their Kingdoms, their intellectual attainments or their civilization.

This work based on assiduous research proved very popular. It instilled in the Andhras a deep pride in their heritage, dispelled the widely prevalent "well-settled belief among the educated men that the Telugus had no past worth recollecting and roused them to demand the recognition of their distinctness."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bomby : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 15. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Karunthattankudi (Tamil கருந்தட்டைகுடியில்): Gründung des Karanthai Tamil Sangam (Tamil கரந்தைத் தமிழ்ச் சங்கம்)


Ramanathapuram (Tamil இராமநாதபுரம்): Tod von Pandithurai Thevar (Tamil பாண்டித்துரைத் தேவர் - Pāṇṭitturait Tēvar, 1867 - 1911)

Pandithurai Thevar
Born Ukkira Pandian

1867 03 21

Died 1911 12 02 aged 44


Nationality Indian
Occupation Zameendhar
Known for Philanthropy
Notable work Establishing Madurai 4th Tamil Sangam


"Among the many grievances of the devotional community was the absence of appreciative patrons who would extend their liberality and largesse to the support of Tamil and its followers. In 1897, as a young man barely fifteen, Subramania Bharati lamented to one such patron, the landlord of Ettayapuram:

In this world, surrounded by oceans and abounding with languages,
Is our glorious and auspicious Tamil, sweeter than nectar, to which the great lord Shiva himself offered his grace;
Yet there is no one around anymore to favor it;
Its learners languish away, while lesser tongues flourish.

(Bharati 1987: 2)

Tamil’s devotees were of course not alone in colonial India in lamenting over the deteriorating state of patronage extended to traditional arts and letters. The attrition and disappearance of royal courts and religious centers of learning, the redirection of funds towards “useful” and “modern” forms of knowledge, the rise of new bourgeois forms of consumption, and a colonial state indifferent to the promotion of India’s languages and literatures—all these contributed to the generalized feeling that things were no longer as they were in the past. The nostalgia for ancient Cankam poems that was so endemic in devotional circles was also very much a nostalgia for an age in which magnanimous kings were imagined to welcome with open arms the poor poet who wandered into their courts, lend an appreciative ear to his compositions, and shower him with food, clothing, and gold. Those were the days, its devotees sigh, when the wealthy and the notable were admirers of Tamil (and of its scholars). But today,

“we lavishly heap our wealth on jewelry, cards, drinks, tobacco, entertainment . . . but would not spend even one paisa out of a hundred rupees to protect [Tamilttay], What a shame!” (Lakshmana Pillai 1892.-93: 1-54).

Not surprisingly, when one such patron did put in an appearance at the turn of this century, and placed his considerable wealth and influence at the service of Tamil, he came to be narrated in devotional writings as a Cankam king reincarnate. The institution that he founded and funded in 1901, the Madurai Tamil Sangam, was itself characterized as the “Fourth” Tamil Cankam, thus establishing a genealogical connection with the three ancient academies that are believed to have flourished in the distant past under the patronage of successive generations of Pandyan kings. Its founder-patron, Pandithurai Theva, named at birth in 1876 Ugrapandyan [உக்கிரபாண்டியன்] (an ancient name that recalled the glory of the Pandyan kings of the Cankam age), was the landlord (zamindar) of Palavanatham, a small estate in Ramanathapuram district. In the reckoning of his biographers and admirers, Pandithurai—unlike many of his zamindari cohort, who frittered away their life and wealth in wasteful activities—was an enthusiastic Tamil scholar and poet himself. He may have inherited his love for Tamil from his father, Ponnusami Thevar [முகவை பொன்னுசாமித் தேவர்] (1837-70), who also had been its patron, “like the Pandyan kings of yore,” in the words of the famous Shaivite scholar Arumuga Navalar (M. Raghava Aiyangar 1948: 51). Indeed, distressed that so many great works of ancient Tamil had yet to find their way into print, Ponnusami, who was then the chief manager of the Ramanathapuram estate of his brother, Muthuramalinga Sethupati (1841-73), commissioned Arumuga Navalar to publish texts such as the Tirukkovaiyar [திருக்கோவையார்] and the Tirukkural, which he then distributed at his own expense to scholars. Ponnusami also established a much-needed printing press for the publication of Tamil books in Ramanathapuram town (M. Raghava Aiyangar 1948: 51-53).

Raised in an environment where such value was placed on Tamil learning, Pandithurai continued this tradition of extending patronage to Tamil and also prevailed upon his more influential cousin, Bhaskara Sethupati (1868-1903), the zamindar of Ramanathapuram, to do the same. Indeed, their “courts,” we are told, were like “heaven on earth.” Here, from morning till late into the night, one could hear learned disquisitions on the intricacies of Kamban’s Iramavataram or the Tirukkural; poets and musicians were frequent visitors, and “forgetting hunger and thirst,” they would sing their compositions and recite poetry. In addition to throwing his court open to visiting scholars, Pandithurai also financed the publication of many ancient manuscripts, including some of Swaminatha Aiyar’s (M. Raghava Aiyangar 1948: 76-95). Tamil enthusiasts narrate with pride an incident from Pandithurai’s life illustrating how his devotion to Tamil led him to ensure that the reading public had access to well-published and error-free editions of their ancient texts. An Anglo-Indian lawyer of Madurai had had the temerity to publish five hundred copies of the Tirukkural, “made easy.” Pandithurai invited him over to his palace and asked to see the publication. He noted with anger that the lawyer had erred in the very first key verse of the text. Learning that only two hundred copies of the publication had been sold so far, Pandithurai purchased the remaining three hundred and burned the whole lot, rather than expose his fellow Tamilians to such a travesty (M. Raghava Aiyangar 1948: 105-7).

The scarcity of good published versions of Tamil literary works was what spurred Pandithurai to found his well-known Sangam. In one version of the story, when he was visiting Madurai and needed copies of the Tirukkural and Kamban’s Iramavataram to prepare a lecture, he discovered that it was impossible to procure them. If these works, the heart of Tamil literature, were unavailable in Madurai, the center of Tamil learning, what fate awaited Tamil? he lamented. Resolving to do something to change this, in 1901 he summoned together various notables and scholars and spoke of the need to create a society dedicated to the improvement of Tamil (M. Raghava Aiyangar 1948: 87-89).

“The rejection of our mother tongue, Tamil, and the embracing of English mostly for the sake of greater comfort, is like the rejection of our mother in favor of our newly arrived wife,”

he declared in his speech urging his fellow speakers to come forward and help him in his new venture.

His idea was not new. Since the 1880s, a few such societies had sprung up in the Presidency, although most were short-lived. No doubt, the Madurai Tamil Sangam’s own longer and more fruitful existence was the result of a convergence of factors: the liberal funding it received from Pandithurai and Bhaskara Setupati (who also used their influence to get other notables to make contributions); the supplementing of the scholarly activities of the Sangam with the establishment of a printing press, a research center, a school that conducted exams and offered degrees in Tamil, and a library (which was started with liberal donations of books from Pandithurai’s and the Setupati’s own collections); and the founding of a journal, Centamiḻ  [செந்தமிழ் - klassisches Tamil], in late 1902. All of these attracted to the Sangam some of the finest minds in the world of Tamil learning. But not least of the reasons for the Sangam’s success was the symbolic capital that accrued from its location in Madurai; from its self-representation as continuing the traditions of the ancient academies of the Tamil land; and from the persona of its founder, Pandithurai, as a true descendant of the great vallals [வள்ளள்], “benefactors,” of yore (Rowther 1907)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 220ff. -- Fair use]


Guntur (Telugu గుంటూరు): Beginn des Andhra movement (Telugu ఆంధ్రోద్యమం - Āndhrōdyamaṁ)

"Soon after the Nidadavole conference [1912-05], some young men of Guntur including Unnava Lakshminarayana, Challa Seshagiri Rao, J. Gurunatham and  Konda Venkatappayya discussed seriously the need for separating the Telugu districts from the Madras Presidency to form a separate province with a separate High Court, Revenue Board etc. and wanted to start an agitation for this purpose. Konda Venkatappayya was urged to undertake the task. Venkatappayya recollects his reactions thus:

To me their talk appeared emotional and ambitious. That great work seemed impossible but I could not tell them straight that I disagreed with them. I felt that I could not and should not discourage such enthusiasts.....So I told them.

‘This is a Herculean task......Some of our own leaders may dislike it. To be strong and successful the movement should have the co-operation of all. We should not frighten them by beginning to demand an Andhra province immediately. We should try to start an Andhra Maha Sabha, hold annual conferences to discuss ways and means to improve the physical, economic and moral conditions of Andhras, and to bring about the all round development, unity and awakening among the Andhras and for these purposes we should carry on propaganda.'

Some extremists among those present expressed different opinions but finally all decided that my suggestion was appropriate. Then, assisted by J. Gurunatham, I prepared a booklet on the movement in English and in Telugu.

The Andhra Movement published by Venkatappayya summed up the aims of the movement thus:

The Andhra movement is only an attempt to open their [i.e. the Telugu people’s] minds to their present backwardness and induce individual exertion as well as corporate action on their part to improve their condition. The chief work of the movement will thus be:

  1. Creating among the people great love for education, culture and high ideals and making provision for their special educational needs by representation to the Government and by other means;
  2. Studying the agricultural and commercial conditions of the country and concerting measures for their progress by creating a spirit of co-operation and by developing mutual trust and confidence;
  3. Stimulating interest in sanitation, health and physical culture and suggesting the means of promoting the physique of the present generation;
  4. Promoting the development of Telugu literature by encouraging the publication of books in the vernacular which arc intended to convey the principles of modem culture and enlightenment to the masses;
  5. Securing the advancement of the claims of the Telugus in public service.

Till then a handful of men here and there had been sporadically articulating the demand for a separate Andhra province and no purposeful organized effort in that direction was made. Now an agitation by a group of zealous, determined and public spirited young men at Guntur led by Konda Venkatappayya, a noble and selfless worker, was launched for inspiring a movement for the all-sided improvement of Andhras."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bomby : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 35f. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]

"Since the beginning of the Andhra movement, Telugu poets began singing the glorious past of the Andhras in different fields like literature, art. martial spirit and maritime commerce and regretted their latter-day backwardness. They were full of praise for Andhra Matha [ఆంధ్ర మాతా] — Mother Andhra and exhorted the Andhras to wake up and feel proud of (to retain the expression in the first person)

 “my race, my country, my language."

One of the songs composed at that time reads:

The soil of Andhra is gold to us
Her waters our nectar.
The Andhra air our life breath
Andhra Desa [Andhra Land] is verily our Deity."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bomby : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 67. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Es erscheint

Satyananda Somasundara Bharathi (Tamil சோமசுந்தர பாரதியார் - Cōmacuntara pāratiyār, 1879 -1959): Tamil Classics and Tamilakam. -- [1912]. -- Wieder abgedruckt in: Siddhanta Deepika or The light of truth and Agamic review. -- Vol. XIV. -- 1913-07. -- S. 1 - 24. -- Online: Siddhanta Deepika Volume 14 : Editors: J.M.Nallasami Pillai, V.V. Raman : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"Having briefly referred to the four current theories propounded by the Scholars of the West and the East about the Original home of the Tamilians being somewhere else than in India, and having pointed out how all of them have run more or less in one groove and turned on one fixed idea of a foreign home, I turn to what I propose to call the Indigenous theory and shall discuss it at some length. According to this theory, the Tamils were not Aliens, but are the “Indigene” whom no Aeneas of the Eastern Aryans could either vanquish or dislodge. The peopling of Tamilakam [தமிழகம்] with this chosen tribe transcends all history, all legends within the memory of man. The first Aryan stranger, who swam south across the trackless jungles, was dazzled with the splendour of the Royal Pandiyan Courts, and he was not too proud to seek shelter in the hospitable Tamil land that smiled to a sunny clime. History finds the Tamils in their present abode long before the Romans conquered Egypt or Christ was born in Bethlehem; before Porus met the Greek or Darius lost his crown; before Plato wrote his Dialogues and Solomon made his songs. In short the Tamil people believe (and tradition supports their belief) that from the start of their existence they lived and thrived in the land watered by the Palar on the north and the sea-swallowed Pahruli on the South.


The only conclusion borne in upon us a reading of the oldest of the old Tamil works is that the Tamils could not have come into southern India from elsewhere. They were here in all the time past, as far as the keenest historic vision or the shrewdest ingenuity of man could pierce through. They grew up on the sunny bosom of Tamilakam between the Mahanadi and the submerged Pahruli rivers, and, like the Swiss patriots, clung 'close and close to their mother’s breast,’ as the ‘loud torrent and the whirlwinds roar but bound them to their native mountains more.’ [Oliver Goldsmith (1851). “The Traveller”, p.7] Although occasionally their martial kings burst into the north, waged wars, levied tributes, and sometimes settled even colonies outside Tamilakam, they loved their home so well that the boldest and most ambitious Tamil warrior always returned from his expeditions to his country in the Tamilakam. However, their intense patriotism was not barren of enterprise. Their sea faring adventurous sons had founded tracing colonies in (1) Chavakam (Java) and in (2) Kadaram (Burma), and when they lost their southern “Lombardy” provinces by the inundation, their country reduced itself to its present limits.

That not only the Tamil country extended itself further south, but that there was a large southern continent inhabited by non-Tamil nations, receives countenance from the Tamil tradition, which is entombed in Ilampuranam [இளம்பூரணர்], and confirmed by evidences of Geologists. Prof. Haeckel assures us that the Indian ocean formed a continent, which extended from the Sunda islands, along the coast of Asia, to the east coast of Africa, and which is of great importance as having been the probable cradle of the human race. Another scientist writes that “ the locality of the origin of the earliest race from recent researches appears to have been on lands now submerged beneath the Indian Ocean.” Sir Walter Raleigh’s History of the World strongly supports this hypothesis regarding the first nursery of man, and affirms that “India was the first planted and peopled country after the flood”.

Some writer have mistaken these geological facts pointing to a lost Southern continent, and argued that this submerged continent was something unconnected with the present Tamil country. They have theorised therefrom that the ancestors of the Tamils should have come into their present settlements, from some far-off Pacific home. The best answer for them is that they are unable to adduce any proofs either geological or traditional, in support of their fond conjectures. On the contrary, there are unmistakable indications in the Tamil traditions that the land affected by the deluge was contiguous with the Tamilakam, and that, after the subsidence, the Tamils naturally betook themselves to their northern provinces. But of the other non-Tamil races that inhabited the regions further south of the lost Tamil provinces, it would stand to reason to expect the survivors naturally to have dispersed in different directions in order to find newer homes either in Europe, Asia or America. Of course there may have been islands formed, and remnants of old nations stranded thereon even in the Pacific regions. But it is nothing unlikely that some brave and enterprising branches voyaged long and far into newer seas and founded colonies in stranger lands. May be some gallant sailors founded settlements on the coasts washed by the waves of the Mediterranean and Arabian seas, even prior to the deluge: and maybe the flotilla of the survivors, after the floods, drifted in quest of their brethren there. Whatever was the genesis of the Phoenician and Ionian settlements, if the submerged 'Lemuria' had sent there even a single shipwrecked sailor after the great subsidence, he should have carried in the same boat the history of the deluge. And imagination and time could not have long left such a fruitful theme unutilised in their new domicile. This story of the Deluge prevalent among the Semitic and the Ionian tribes should be viewed rather as corroborative evidence in confirmation of the traditional Tamil home than as an argument to give the Tamils a Chaldean home.

From what has been stated and cited, it will be abundantly clear that, apart front the master passion of the Western scholars that gave the Tamils too a foreign home, there is nothing in the Tamil classics of undoubted antiquity that will countenance such a fall, and that progressive geological research is ready and willing to shake hands with the primeval poems of the Tamil country and establish that the ancestral home of the Tamils was in the far south of the Indian continent now under the sea and not above the snow-clad Himalayan heights, or in the land of the celestials, or in the country of the Hebrews before their dispersion. In short, the original abode of the Tamils was none other than the time-honoured Tamilakam in South India, part of which, with all its gems and gem-like treasures, the Indian Ocean has bidden in her vast bosom and which she is not willing to part with or reveal though centuries upon centuries have rolled silently away."

[a.a.O., S. 6 ; 22 - 24. -- Fair use]

1913 - 1917

Zum Andhra Movement (Telugu ఆంధ్రోద్యమం - Āndhrōdyamaṁ):


A number of prominent Andhras, at some time or other, particularly during the period 1913 to 1917 spoke and wrote about the necessity of an Andhra Province. The principles and the scheme of linguistic provinces may best be expressed in their own words:

A Sub-national Movement

Some argue that the word ‘race’ implies blood relationship, [and that] the Andhras do not constitute a separate race ... The word 'race' is now applied not only to people related by blood relationship, but even to those bound together by common language, common history or common government. In the dictionary the word 'Jati' [జాతి] is defined as a class of animals or human beings having common characteristics . . The differences between the two peoples [Andhras and Tamils] is a real one ... The Andhra movement [is] really a sub-national movement aiming at the development of the Andhra people, and deserving the sympathy and co-operation of the people in the other parts of India and also of the Government.

Importance of Common Language

Common language is the best tic which binds man to man and mind to mind. Common language means further common tradition, common customs, morals and religion, as a rule common aspirations and ideals and common means of advancement by the help of a common literature considerations like these lead logically to the conclusion that the language area is the most natural educational unit and with it the right territorial unit for almost everything also.

India has had a central government for ages, but its past history as well as the history of the peoples in the world in general docs not encourage one to entertain (the) hope [of inducing the people of India to adopt one language even in the very remote future]. The idea of introducing Hindi as the universal language in India is chimerical in the extreme and even if it were possible it cannot of itself wipe away the distinctions and fuse all the races into one homogenous Indian nationality and such a consummation is not even desirable. Better remain as we are than attain the Indian Nationality, by such a heavy sacrifice of our mother-tongue and the beautiful Andhra literature which is the treasure of hoary ages, and by the adoption of a language with a second rate literature in place of the Italian of the East (i.e. Telugu].

The Goal -- A Federation

India is a continent by itself. Each race in India is a unit in the Indian Nationality. The efficiency of units conduces to the efficiency of the whole. A weak Andhra race means a weak Indian Nationality. Unless the parts of a whole are fully developed the whole cannot have a harmonious growth. The comparative growth of one part at the expense of the other leads to the deterioration and brings about disease in the organism. Likewise the free and full growth of Indian races on their own lines contributes to the solid growth of the Indian Nationality as a whole . [The future of the Indian Nation] will be a federated Indian Nationality, where each race having to play its own part without detriment to the Indian Nation and having developed equally successfully, co-operates with the other for the good of India The United States of future India under the aegis of Great Britain will have to work on the same lines as the United States of America, and must have the American nation as an example to imitate consisting as it docs of heterogenous races like India. The division of India into small self-contained administrative units will promote the efficiency of a united Indian Nationality instead of marring the unity of Indian nation as some anticipate?

Andhras First and Indians Next

[Another charge is that] we consider ourselves Andhras first and Indians next. In the evolution of political thought that sentiment is absolutely necessary for federal constitutions. Federation would be meaningless without that sentiment. While an Indian's patriotism for the whole country is general his patriotism for his little province must not be lost sight of but shown wherever there is need for it.

There remains the larger question whether such isolation [arising out of linguistic reorganisation of provinces] of an administrative character will not be a bar to the future upbuilding of the Indian nationality. We may just note that demarcation into separate provinces has not in the past alienated Madras from Bombay and Bengal from U.P. [United Provinces of Agra and Oudh]. The future Andhra will no more be inimical to the future Dravidian than the Englishman is to the Scot or the Welshman. Why is it that Scotland and Wales are seeking in common with Ireland separate parliaments and recommending the same to England? That is the trend of the modern progress which aims not at fusion but at federation which does not seek to establish unity only among factors wholly similar, but strives to discover a general harmony amongst communities, presenting a variety of structure and development and it would be the greatest superstition to delimit to the existing ten the division that will constitute the future autonomies [sic] of a federated India?

Meaning of a Linguistic Province

The Government through an alien language has given a general air of alienness to the administration itself, so that every usage or institution of that administration, however harmless or beneficent in itself to the people, was so to speak morally rejected under instinctive apprehension of its unsuitedness to the Indian life or where persistently enforced, was silently submitted to as part of the inevitable indemnity of conquest. If this explanation be right, the one and only remedy must be in the complete adoption of the vernacular as the language of the administration in the land, in the necessary modification of the personnel of Government at least to the limit of the District administration in accordance therewith ... But allowing for the inevitable supremacy of both [English] language and personnel in the highest sphere of executive government, the fountain sources of legislation and administration must be laid entirely in the realm of the vernacular, rendering possible the fresh and fullest discussion of all vital problems of public interest, and their publication as deep and wide as would be necessary to reach the millions toiling in the Indian villages. Such dominance of the vernacular in the mutual relation of the Government and the people is bound to make the task of administration infinitely easier and more satisfactory. It will raise the efficiency of administration     Similarly the complete adoption of the vernacular in civil and criminal courts would not only ensure natural and substantial justice, effecting incalculable saving in time and money but would ultimately help in simplifying law and procedure in harmony with the social instincts of an essentially agricultural people The next important corollary to reorganisation of provinces on a linguistic basis is the free and universal acceptance of the vernacular as the sole medium of instruction in all the educational institutions of the land/

Too Many Provinces?

It may be feared that such a scheme [of linguistic reorganization] would necessitate too many provinces but in this vast country where nearly hundred and forty-seven languages are spoken, those with a distinctive literature and culture of their own are not more than 15 or 16. Accordingly in our ideal scheme of “one province, one language”, we may not have to provide for more than 15 or 16 provinces. The day may indeed come when the growth of population, the needs of administration, the aspirations of the people marked by local variations in manner and temperament, and political expediency may demand a further increase in the number of provinces, so that we cannot lay down the proposition of 'one language, one province’ and just as the Hindi speaking people being even now too numerous for one province have absorbed two provinces for themselves, other language areas may at a remote future comprise more than one province."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bomby : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 321ff. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]

1913 ff.

Zum Disput zwischen Telugus und Tamilen über Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్)


The claims of the Andhras to the city may be briefly summarised as follows:

It was a Telugu King who owned the soil on which the Fort Fort St. George and the city sprang up The areas surrounding Fort St. George belonged to the Telugu kings. The king, in his grant, wanted that the city be esteemed for all times as a Telugu city. The Telugus were there already. The city was known as a Telugu city to foreign travellers for a very long time. The prominent native officials likeConicoply or Karnam, Adigari, Peddinague, Dubashes and the chief merchants connected with the East India Company in Madras at that time were Telugus. The orders notifications, proclamations, etc. issued from Fort St. George were in the Telugu language.

These claims of the Andhras are largely true so far as the Chennapatnam [చెన్నపట్నం] of the 17th century was concerned; but it is necessary to bear in mind that the boundaries of Madras expanded since then. The official centre of the settlement founded in 1639 was designated as Fort St. George. The British applied the name Madraspatam— which gradually became Madras to the combined Towns of Chennapatam and Madraspatam. The original site of the village of Madraspatam is probably to be found on the northern esplanade of modern Fort. St. George. Outside the bounds of Madraspatam was a group of villages comprising Tandore on the north, Perambore to the north-west, Vepery and Purasawalkam on the west, Egmore and Nungambaukum to the south-west and the Triplicane on the south. These villages, with others, are now included in the urban area, but they were acquired by the British only later. Chintadripet was not founded until the eighteenth century. With the addition of these and other areas, the growing city also came to be called Madras.

Abb.: Madras, Baedeker, 1914
[Public domain]

The Tamil Case

The Tamil claims to the city were based on solid grounds. The Tamils constitute the majority of the population in the city which is also surround ed by Tamil areas.

The first Census of Madras, for which details of the population speaking each language are available, was in the year 1881. It showed that in a total population of 405.848, the Tamils numbered 239.108, the Telugus 94.330, the Hindusthanis 46,410, the Canarese 1.186, the Malayalees 232 and the Marathis 4,238.

Abb.: Bevölkerung von Madras, 1881

In the next Census (1891) people born in the City of Madras and enumerated there accounted for 72 percent of the Madras population. Of the remaining, 11.72 per cent were born in the Chingleput District, and 16.28 per cent in other districts. The population of those born in South Arcot and Tanjore districts and enumerated in Madras City had risen considerably. Adverse seasonal conditions like famine, the early spread of railways in the Tamil districts and the consequent constant flow of Tamils in the City might have accounted for 58 per cent of their population in 1891 and subsequent increase in the Tamil population only increased their percentage. Thus by 1931 they constituted 63.63 per cent of the total population and the inclusion of about 20 square miles of Saidapet, including Saidapet Municipality in 1940's within the Corporation area, increased the Tamil population to 67.92 per cent in 1951.

Census Suspected

Prakasam and others suspected some mischief by enumerators who were mostly Tamils and so questioned the validity of the Census statements which showed Tamils to be a majority in the City. Allegations of boosting the population figures of a particular community or a linguistic group in various ways and questioning the veracity of Census seem to be a recurring phenomenon; but we have no other statistics to go by than the Census. Further, it is difficult to believe that mischief had been deliberately played from the l880's to the end of the first decade of the present century when the demand for an Andhra Province was nowhere in the picture.

Old Claims

In the early years of the Andhra Movement, the considered view of almost all its protagonists was that Madras, not being a Telugu city, had no place in the future Andhra Province. The Andhra Province maps published at that time excluded Madras. The articles in the press argued that the Andhra backwardness was due, among other things, to the situation of the capital in a far-off corner dominated by Tamils. The remedy, the Andhras felt, lay in having a separate Province with the capital in its midst. The Reorganisation of Indian Provinces, prepared and submitted by the Standing Committee of the AMS [Andhra Mahasabha] to the Indian National Congress in 1916, explicitly included the city in the Dravida [Tamil] Province. But the Andhra leaders were not oblivious of the existence of a large Telugu population in the Madras City. Konda Venkatappayya in his speech at the Bapatla Conference (1913) said that, if one went through the past history of Madras and the importance of the Andhra merchants in it, it was clear that the Andhras, like others, had claims over the city. The first suggestion that Madras could be the Andhra capital and some other place the Capital for the residuary Madras Province was made at the Nellore Conference (1917) by O. V. Rangayya Pantulu, the Chairman of the Reception Committee. The amendments to include Madras City in the Andhra Province were lost at the Conference, but made the leaders of the movement realise the necessity of including it to have the co operation of the Ceded Districts. Persistent demands for the inclusion of the city in the  Andhra Province began from 1918. The APCC [Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee] formed in 1918 included it in its jurisdiction. The AMS Conferences since 1918, in their resolutions, demanded an Andhra Province for the 12 districts including Madras.

After the Congress was reorganised on the linguistic basis in 1920, the question of jurisdiction over the city of Madras cropped up. G. Sitarama Sastri (later Swami Sitaram), then General Secretary of the APCC, was the first to suggest that Madras be made a separate City Province like Bombay. The Congress heard both the claims of the Tamils and Telugus and allowed both the APCC and the TNCC [Tamil Nadu Congress Committee] to enlist members from any and every ward of the city. A resolution seeking a separate Congress circle for the city was lost in the Subjects Committee of the Cocanada Congress in 1923. Next year, the AMS held its session for the first time in Madras when G. Rangiah Naidu, the Chairman of the Reception Committee, and himself a native of Madras, claimed that Madras was an Andhra city. In 1925, a proposal to include the City of Madras under the jurisdiction of the proposed Andhra University was rejected by the Select Committee on the Andhra University Bills after a heated debate. The provision to affiliate a second grade college in Madras to the Andhra University, opposed only by Dr. P. Subbaroyan and T. M. Narasimhacharlu out of a total of 33 members  was dropped only at the final stage. In 1926 Sir Sankaran Nair, a Malayalee, stated that Madras was half-Telugu and half Tamil. Ramadas Pantulu’s resolution in the Council of State included northern portion of Madras as part of Andhra Province. The surplus funds of about Rs. 20,000/- of the Madras Congress Session (December 1927) were divided equally between the APCC and the TNCC, both of which had jurisdiction over the city. Andhras were in the forefront in the Congress agitations in the city particularly during the boycott of the Simon Commission and Salt Satyagraha.

The Andhras entertained hopes in the 193O’s that a province would soon be formed. So the discussion on the future capital began. Earlier, the Raja of Panagal held the view that Madras should be retained as the Andhra Capital. The desire to satisfy the public opinion in Rayalaseema was evident when Ramadas Panlulu wanted that Madras should be the Andhra Capital for the time being, or at all events, until such time as another city was selected with the practically unanimous consent of all the Andhra districts if such a change was felt necessary and desirable in the light of the developments that would follow in the wake of the new province. The sufficiently strong opinion in and outside the Andhra districts in favour of making Madras, the capital of Andhra Province, was indicated when an amendment aimed at making Madras the capital of Andhra Province was lost by only one vote in the Madras Legislative Council in I933. The voting was 19 for, 20 against and 22 neutral. Of the elected members, 15 were for, 12 against and 6 neutral.

This was not obviously to the liking of some of the TNCC leaders. They directed their efforts first to have exclusive jurisdiction over the city. C.R.  [C. Rajagopalachari] retired from public life in 1935. Satyamurthi became the President of the TNCC and tried his best to see that Madras City was excluded from the jurisdiction of the APCC. The APCC, represented by Sambamurthy, would at best agree for the constitution of the cosmopolitan Madras City into a separate Congress circle reserving to itself the right of claiming Madras as a part of the Andhra Province when it was constituted. The Congress Working Committee favoured a separate Congress circle for the city but wanted an amicable settlement between the APCC and the TNCC.

Satyamurthi's unwillingness for such a proposal resulted in the continuance of the status quo. There was consultation and cooperation between the APCC and TNCC in the matter of selecting candidates from the city in all the elections to the legislature and the Corporation contested by the Congress from 1920 to 1946. Prakasam and some other Telugus won the 1937 and 1946 elections from the city constituencies.

The 1936 session of the AMS resolved that when an Andhra Province was constituted Madras should be the capita) of the Andhra Province also. But the Sri Bagh Pact which was concluded between the Rayalaseema leaders and the Circars leaders in November 1937, made no reference to the city. One obvious reason was that Pattabhi, one of the active participants in the talks, had felt that an emphasis on the inclusion of Madras City might only delay the formation of an Andhra Province. Probably the signatories to the pact from Rayalaseema Districts also felt like wise. The Andhra University headquarters location affair (1926-1929) possibly made them apprehend that the Capital and the High Court too would be located somewhere in the far-off coastal districts. They did not want to be losers in the event of the formation of an Andhra Province without Madras City. Hence the stipulation regarding the Capital and the High Court in the Sri Bagh Pact.

Prakasam, Koti Reddy, Sambamurthy and some others believed in the necessity and possibility of including the city in the Andhra Province . It is difficult to say whether their demand stemmed from their interest in satisfying the Rayalaseema or in the advantages and facilities available in the city or both. Their view succeeded when the AMS session at Madras in 1938 resolved that Madras should be the capital of the Andhra Province. The TNCC immediately wanted the city of Madras and the territory extending as far as the Tirupathi Hills to be part of the Tamil province exclusively. A few months later, the Madras Cabinet acquiesced in Lord Erskine’s suggestion that Madras could be the capital for both the provinces with the same Governor presiding over both the Cabinets. Later, it was said, Lord Erskine changed his mind and wrote to the Secretary of State for India against the formation of Andhra Province. Satyamurthi became the Mayor of Madras Corporation in 1939 and again made some unsuccessful attempts to exclude APCC from jurisdiction over Madras city. In 1945 Sir Norman Strathie, Adviser to the Madras Governor, opined that Madras could be a separate Province like Delhi, and Vijayawada and Trichinopoly the capitals of Andhra and Tamilnadu, respectively. The suggestion was welcomed by the Andhra Leaders. While it may be seen that the different Andhra leaders held different opinions regarding the inclusion of Madras City in the Andhra Province, the Tamil leaders, without a single exception, were for the inclusion of Madras in Tamilnadu.

Madras, a Separate Province

The advent of independence, and the consequent possibility of the creation of an Andhra Province in the near future only intensified the claims and counter claims of Telugus and Tamils over the city.

During the visit of the Dar Commission, the Madras Government, in its reply to the questionnaire issued by the Commission, expressed itself firmly against making Madras a separate Province or a sub-province. But Dr Krishna Pillai, on behalf of the Kerala Samaj, representing about two lakhs Malayalees of the city, waited on the Commission demanding that the city be made a Chief Commissioner’s State. Similar was the opinion of the Hindusthan Chamber of Commerce whose representatives, S. M Patel, C. M. Kothari, B. K. Vora, Keshavlal K. Shah, J. P Sanghrajka, Inder Sain and others, waited on the Commission. They suggested the formation of Madras City into a Chief Commissioner’s State if the province was divided on linguistic basis. The Gujarati Mandal supported the view.

On the basis of the evidence tendered and memoranda submitted by people of all shades of opinion, the Dar Commission, which was against the formation of linguistic Provinces suggested the exclusion of Bombay and Madras cities from any unilingual province, in the event of creation of linguistic provinces. The TNCC Executive was highly critical of that recommendation . In September 1948, the Tamilnad Boundary Committee (sponsored mainly by the TNCC) decided to contest the ensuing corporation elections, which, it considered, would be “really a plebiscite" on the question whether Madras city was Tamil or Andhra. Only 25 out of its 55 candidates were successful.

Importance of the City

Madras developed owing to the efforts of all the linguistic groups in the city, particularly the Tamils and the Telugus, the largest groups. Since the founding of the Fort St. George, it was the headquarters of the Presidency and so a number of government buildings were located in the city. It was a centre of business, had the port, aerodrome and other facilities, It was the educational centre of the Presidency. The post-graduate and professional colleges were almost concentrated there. Giving up the city would mean giving up these educational advantages. The Telugus had already been complaining since the 1940's that the Madras Government had been gradually decreasing educational facilities to the Telugu children in the city schools. They were apprehensive that once the city became the headquarters of a Tamil Province, even the then existing facilities might be diminished.

The inclusion of the city was demanded on financial grounds too. Excluding the city, the Telugu districts had, on the basis of 1948-49 accounts, a deficit of Rs. 201.01 lakhs , and the non-Telugu districts a deficit of Rs. 179.44 lakhs. The Madras city had a surplus of Rs. 208.96 lakhs. Consequent on the separation of the Telugu districts, the non-Telugu districts including Madras city were estimated to have a deficit of Rs. 56.48 lakhs.

Various Suggestions

In view of these claims and counter-claims over the city, various suggestions were made, mostly by the Andhras, as to the status of the city in the event of the formation of linguistic provinces. The suggestions were

  1. to make it the common capital for both the Andhra and Tamil Provinces,

  2. to make the city itself or with the inclusion of some surrounding areas into a separate Province, and

  3. to divide the city into North Madras and South Madras with Cooum as the boundary and making North Madras and South Madras, the Capitals of Andhra and Tamil Provinces, respectively.


At a very late stage there was more or less unanimous opinion among the Andhras that the city be made a Part C State. They repeatedly pleaded for arbitration of disputed issues including the status of Madras city. The Tamils did not even consider these suggestions. With one voice all of them demanded the inclusion of the city in the Tamil Province. Possibly it was the hope of the Andhras and the apprehension of the Tamils that once the issue was left for arbitration, any arbitrator, considering the claims of both and the advantages of which one of them would be deprived, if the city were to be included in the other, would come to the conclusion, (as the Dar Commission did), that it would be better to make it a Part C State, i.e., a State administered by the Central Government. One curious fact was almost all, who vociferously demanded the inclusion of the city in cither province, did not belong to the city by birth or parentage. Such examples are Prakasam, Swami Sitaram, Sambamurthi, C.R . Satyamurthi, C. Subramanyam and Kamaraj Nadar.

Yet it is doubtful that the creation of Madras as a Part C State would have solved the problem. Creation of Andhra and Tamil Provinces would have naturally increased the demand for other linguistic provinces in post-independent India. Madras was not the only city having significantly large groups of people speaking different languages. Bangalore, Trivandrum, Hyderabad, Bombay, and Calcutta are some of the cities in this category. If the principle of linguistic provinces and the creation of disputed cities into Part C States are both accepted it may be demanded that all these cities be made Part C States and the question of finding new capitals for Andhra, Tamilnad, Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra, to give only a few examples, would arise. May be, the new States might have to depend upon their own resources or seek central grants to have new capitals. The Government of India would not allow all these new problems to crop up simply because it could not take a firm decision to allow Bombay and Madras Cities to be included in unilingual provinces. So the status quo continued."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bombay : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 225 - 230. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్): Es erscheint:

Gidugu Venkata Ramamurthy (Telugu గిడుగు వెంకట రామమూర్తి - Giḍugu Veṅkaṭa Rāmamūrti, 1863 - 1940): A memorandum on modern Telugu. -- Madras : Guardian, 1913. -- 61 S.

"Prologue to a memorandum on modern Telugu

This memorandum was written in June 1912 shortly after the meeting of the Conference of the Telugu Pandits held at Madras under the auspices of the Telugu Academy recently formed there. My object in writing it was

  1. to vindicate the dignity of Modern Telugu, the genuine mother-tongue of the educated classes and its right to be used as the best medium of instruction and literary expression; and

  2. to refute the arguments advanced by the Pandits and the Academy against the “Modern Telugu Movement".

A committee of some of the leading members of the Academy was deputed to wait upon the Governor of Madras and present to His Excellency a copy of the Resolutions of the Pandits’ Conference. I was of the apprehension that if the narrow views of the pedants supported by the misguided zeal of the Academy were to prevail, irreparable harm would be done to the Telugu community. The Pandits rejected the views of the Modern Teachers submitted to them for consideration. I, therefore, thought it my duty to place these modern views before the authorities and prepared the Memorandum with two Appendixes—A. in which were briefly explained some of the important points of difference between Modern Standard Telugu and old Literary Telugu; and B, in which were criticised the Resolutions of the Conference relating to Erotics.

At the interview with His Excellency, the members of the Deputation are reported to have considerably modified the views of the Pandits, which are evidently so absurd that no one who is not obsessed with the Pandit’s pedantry or the counter-Reformation zeal of the Academy could take serious notice of them. Thanks to the policy of the government, no harm came of the misguided agitation of the conservatives and the reactionaries. The government wisely refused to muzzle the mouths of the modern teachers at the bidding of the Academy: they would remain neutral.

Frustrated in its first attempt to inveigle the government with the ipse dixit of the orthodox Pandit in support of its crusade against the modern ideas and eager to achieve something to justify its existence, it now plays the role of a champion of “Refined Telugu” and seeks to overawe the government by a grand demonstration of “Public opposition” to the “Modern Telugu Movement”. It is moving heaven and earth; it has set up gigantic machinery; its agents are working energetically to obtain signatures of as many persons as possible in support of the memorial. It is hopeful that this time the modern idea will be knocked on the head. Vain hope! The “modern" idea will live with “modern" Telugu, but the Academy is a lifeless machine with no motive power hut a false conception and false patriotism. It makes believe that the artificial language which some of its members have manufactured by modernising some old phrases and antiquating some modern forms could be galvanised into living speech if only schoolchildren were taught to speak and write in it. I would rather that it set an example to others: charity begins at home. A correspondent for Krishna Patrika has pointed out more than eighty violations of grammar in the Telugu translation of the very memorial which the Academy is going to submit to the government in order that the authority of the old grammar may be upheld and enforced. The Academy's own grammatical recipe fails in the case of the academicians themselves, whose ungrammaticality is congenital and who live amidst surroundings and in an atmosphere hopelessly ungrammatical. Let these academicians heal themselves before they undertake to prescribe for the whole world. The modern teacher most respectfully begs leave to challenge the Academy to prove what it professes and to vindicate its name by passing an arret laying down:

That it is the sine qua non of a Member of the Telugu Academy that he shall be able to speak readily the language which the Academy has decreed for use in the whole Telugu community. That every M.T.A. [Member of the Telugu Academy] whose mother—tongue is Telugu shall take the pledge that he will use in all the concerns of life, public and private, this language and not the mother-tongue which the Academy has condemned as a vulgar and ungrammatical jargon. That, if the M.T.A.s already enrolled, everyone who fails to qualify himself for membership in the manner aforesaid within twelve months from the date of the arret shall ipso facto ceases to be M.T.A. That hereafter... qualified Telugu scholars shall be admitted into the Academy.

But the Academy dare not do it. Why? What did the rats do when they were asked to carry out the resolution to bell the cat which they proposed so confidently? Not a tail of them was seen!

The sympathy of Rao Bahadur K. Veeresalingam Pantulu Garu with the present agitation of the Academy has now given it some undue importance. The veteran reformer is honoured by the modern teachers no less than by the Academy as one who has done great service to the Telugu community by his attacks on the orthodox Pandits’ corrupt literary ideals and unintelligible literary Telugu and by his advocacy of the diffusion of useful knowledge and modern ideas among the people. His efforts have certainly been attended with a fair measure of success. It is partly due to him that there are more persons now than fifty years ago who can understand the school-book-Telugu, which he has done so much to refine. But most of those who admire his achievements ignore the limitations of this schoolbook dialect. It is certainly more intelligible than the Pandits’ Telugu (the language of Vasucharitra or the Vigraham of Mahamahopadhyaya  K. Venkataratnam Pantulu Garu), but it is nonetheless an artificial language, different structure from the living speech; and, for that very reason, it is impossible for the average Telugu man, even though he belongs to an educated family, to speak or write it as freely as he does his mother tongue. The book-Telugu refined as it is by Viresalingam Pantulu Garu and others is, at the best, like Esperanto with all its defects and none of its merits. It is to be hoped that whatever his [recent] attitude may be to ‘modern ideas’, the Reformer who [fought out] successfully against the tyranny and bigotry of the Pandit will not support the tyranny and bigotry of the Academy. He wisely kept himself aloof while the Academy was hurrahing the Pandits who glorified their foul Erotic literature and the merits of the extinct symbols of the half nasals and the whirring burrs. The Modern teacher is now under the influence of ideas which are in a way different from those which influenced our revered reformer forty years ago. The ideas relating to the evolution of language, the function of grammar, the teaching of mother tongue, popular education, national literature, etc., have now changed a good deal. It would be most lamentable if the old Reformer condemned progress beyond the stage to which he himself has led it. Did Luther go back to Rome when he saw other protestants holding views more liberal than his own.

Is the “Modern Telugu Movement" any way inimical to progress? Educators! Well-wishers of the Telugu! Just think of this! There are 925 out of every 1,000 Telugus who do not know how to write their own name; or read what is printed on a railway ticket! Sixty per cent of the Brahmans themselves are still as illiterate as the Pariahs! The Brahman Pandit himself cannot at all speak classical literary Telugu; he can hardly write it correctly or with facility. Neither he nor anyone else ever uses it in the practical concern of life. But the language which he uses in his daily life is not only perfectly intelligible to others but is actually spoken by a good many people of the other castes; it is certainly almost as fashionable a living dialect of standard English and is now evidently spreading more and more widely, day by day, as communication increases. Do you believe to succeed in educating the illiterate millions through the medium of the lifeless, old. literary Telugu which the Academy advocates or the living, modern, polite dialect of the educated classes for which the modern teacher is fighting? Will you join the Academy in its prayer that government should “discountenance” the “modern Telugu movement”? Do you not know that there is hardly one per cent among the teachers now employed in the elementary or secondary school or the colleges who can teach literary Telugu of the Pandit? Inspectors or Telugu? How many of the supervisors, sub-assistant inspectors, assistant inspectors or inspectors of school know the Pandit’s Telugu? How could this Telugu be taught at schools when there is no teacher who can speak it? What is it that counts most in education: knowledge of things, or merely old meaningless sounds? The modern teacher has something to say on this subject in which you profess to be most interested in the [education] of the Telugu community. He does not want to force his views on others; he does not ask the government to proscribe the study of old Telugu; but he claims freedom to teach modern Telugu according to the best methods known to him; and he claims the right to preach what he thinks best. He believes that education through the medium of the modern language will bridge the wide gulf which separates classes and masses. To deny him what he is justified in claiming does not conduce to the progress of education. He is misrepresented by his opponents, who say that he advocates the vulgar tongue of the uneducated classes and that he aims at the destruction of the classical Telugu literature. Do not believe a word of it. On the other hand, he condemns “Vulgarity" more vehemently than the Pandits or the Academy and has a more genuine regard for the ancient literature, the cultivation of which he heartily commends to those who have the aptitude for it. What he urges is indeed a new idea, but he has faith in it. To train the “seeing eye" as Thring put it. the mother tongue is to be cultivated the genuine living language, not the artificial “cant” of school books, which, however refined, or however familiar to old-fashioned writers and teachers, does not lend itself to be treated as a natural medium of "self-expression" to children. Is it not unreasonable to condemn and forbid an experiment to prove this idea? If it has any merit in it will live. The fittest will survive. Let it have a chance to prove its merits. True progress is through the conflict between the old and new ideas. The modern teacher demands fair play, no favour.

The writer will be much obliged to those who favour him with their opinions on the views embodied in his Memorandum.


January 1913

G.V. Ramamurti"

[Quelle: Critical discourse in Telugu / ed by K. Suneetha Rani. -- Critical Discourse in Telugu - Google Play Books]


Bapatla (Telugu బాపట్ల): Konferenz der Andhra Maha Sabha (AMS - Telugu ఆంధ్ర మహాసభ - Āndhra mahāsabha)

"The Andhra Conference, which came to be known as Andhra Mahajana Sabha or Andhra Maha Sabha (hereafter referred to as AMS) met in Bapatla on 20 May 1913. About 2000 visitors and 800 delegates from the Telugu districts of the Presidency attended the conference. Some delegates from Nagpur, Warangal and Hyderabad were also present. The venue of the conference had 22 gates each of which displayed in clear golden letters the names of poets, heroes and heroines prominent in the Andhra history or letters. All present — the Hindus, the Muslims and the Christians -- joined in the prayers with which the conference began and sang Vande Mataram. The proceedings were in Telugu.

The President. Mr. (later Sir) B. N. Sarma, then a member of the Legislative Council of Madras, exhorted the audience that:

the activities of the Andhras or Telugu-speaking people wherever they may be, in whatever climate they may reside, should be directed towards promoting:

  1. reverence to the throne,

  2. harmony, union, peace and goodwill among themselves so as to enable them to act as one man for the common weal,

  3. creation of an esprit de corps amongst them, a spirit of brotherhood, a nationality based on common tradition. interests and aspirations, and towards uplifting themselves in the scale of nations by their education, character and wealth.

He appealed to the audience to work for the uplift of the country and to remember that they were Indians first and the sons of “Mother Andhra" only next.

The resolution on the Andhra province, being the most important, provoked much discussion al the conference. The President, in his address, had stated that the Andhra Conference as such would discuss no resolution on the Andhra province, except by leave of all concerned and that there should be a fair consensus of opinion after the consideration of the question by the district conferences. Even so he felt that the subject should be considered beyond the scope of its activities. The Subjects Committee accepted the principle of the resolution unanimously, but was almost equally divided on whether it should be discussed at that conference. At the open session V. Ramadas Pantulu, from Madras, proposing the resolution on Andhra province, remarked that the Andhra movement would be lifeless without an ideal and a separate government for Andhra should be the aim of the conference. Dewan Bahadur M. Audinarayanayya, a retired Deputy Commissioner of Revenue Settlement, agreed with the larger question of provincial autonomy but felt that the resolution was premature and superfluous. He was taken by surprise because it had not been on the agenda published at first by the Committee. He thought they ought not to hurry up that discussion at the very first conference. Rao Saheb Ganti Venkata Ramiah condemned it as inconsistent and inexpedient and suggested that the opinions of other Indian linguistic groups should be ascertained before the conference could take up the issue. The heated discussion, lasting for about 3 hours, made some recall to their memory the days of the Surat fiasco. Konda Venkatappayya, the Chairman of the Reception Committee, proposed an amendment which would not commit the conference to any view in this regard; but another amendment moved by Krishna Row was accepted. The resolution as amended was passed by a majority. It stated:

That as some of the Andhras are of opinion:

  1. that, to ensure efficient administration and the promotion of the best interests of the people of India, the government will have to make sooner or later language areas the territorial basis for provincial administration;

  2. and that provincial administration on such a basis is necessary in order that self-government on colonial lines pleaded for by the Indian National Congress and provincial autonomy approved by the Government of India may develop on natural and healthy lines this Conference requests the Andhra Conference Committee, now appointed, to ascertain public opinion on the question whether the government should be asked to constitute the Telugu districts into a separate province."

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bomby : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 49ff. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Subramaniya Siva (Tamil சுப்பிரமணிய சிவா - Cuppiramaṇiya Civā, 1884 - 1925) über Tamil:


We have only insisted that we should write in a Tamil that is free of English. We have never said that we should have a tanittamil that is free of Sanskrit. . . . There is little doubt however that Tamil is a unique language (tanipasai).

Nevertheless, because of the interactions between Tamilians and Aryans for a long time, Tamilians have become habituated to innumerable Sanskrit words. If we thought it was possible to easily write essays these days in a tanittamil that is free of Sanskrit, would we announce that we would reward someone for this?

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 147f. -- Fair use]


Five Rupees ! Can you write pure or chaste Tamil? If you can, come forward. An admirer of Tamil has offered a reward of five rupees to the person who will contribute an article to our `Gnanabanu' in pure Tamil without using words from Sanskrit or any other language and in not less than eight pages, on either the greatness of Tamil or the history of Thiruvalluva Nayanar.

Such words "Kayam' which is merely another version in Tamil of the Sanskrit word 'Kajam' also should be avoided. In short only pure Tamil words, without any connection with the foreign languages alone should be used.

The articles should be sent to our `Gnanabanu` office within the 15th of Avani. That article which wins the prize will be pub lished in our magazine. Those who want any further information on the suject may write to the following address." Secretary "Gnanabanu" Mylapore, Madras. (Gnanabanu, July, 1915)


"The life of a country is to be found in its language. Those who give up their mother tongue can be said to be committing suicide because of foolishness or of madness. If committing suicide is a crime against the state, he who begins to kill himself and his society by neglecting his state language is a person who commits crimes a thousand fold. Though the law of the country does not include these murderers in the list of criminals, they are culprits according to the laws of creation followed by that All-Powerful Deity who rules over the whole universe as the sole Empress" (Gnanabanu -September 1915).


"O, you Tamil Pandits and you great men of Tamilnadu, be careful, be careful! Protect your language. Remember that the life of a society lies in its language. If the Tamil tongue gets destroyed, the Tamil people themselves will lose their name and fame. Teach those citizens of Bharat, who say unhesitatingly that Tamil does not possess a sufficient number of necessary words, that it is not so by searching for and finding out those words in the language.

"Let your tongue speak only Tamil. Let the quill that you use write only Tamil. Let your heart long for only Tamil. May Mother Tamil mercifully protect you from any danger," (Gnanabanu, November 1915).

[Quelle: M.P.Sivagnanam: Subramania Siva - Subramania Sivam ( -- Zugriff am 2021-10-27. -- Fair use]


Die Telugu Wochenzeitung ఆంధ్రపత్రిక (Andhra Patrika):

"These Pillais [Tamil பிள்ளை] and Ayyars [Tamil ஐயர்] will never sympathise with the Andhra movement [Telugu ఆంధ్రోద్యమం]. They came to the Andhra country to make money and go back to their native homes. Our separation from the Tamilians will certainly not affect the unity of the Indian nation hut will surely affect the supremacy of the Tamilian in the Telugu country . . . who was it that stood against the question of an Andhra province coming up for discussion in the Congress at Madras [Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్]?

[Quelle: K. V. Narayana Rao (1934 - ): The emergence of Andhra Pradesh. -- Bombay : Popular Prakashan, 1973. -- 350 S. -- S. 148. -- Online: The emergence of Andhra Pradesh : Narayana Rao, K. V., 1934- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Maraimalai_Adigal  (Tamil மறைமலை அடிகள் - Maṟaimalai Aṭikaḷ, 1876 - 1950) begründet Thani Tamil Iyakkam (Tamil தனித் தமிழ் இயக்கம் - Taṉit tamiḻ iyakkam) (Pure or Independent Tamil Movement). Um 1900 hatten ca. 50% der Wörter in Schrift-Tamil ihren Ursprung im Sanskrit, 1950 sind es nur noch 20%.

"One evening, when she was barely thirteen, Nilambikai [நீலாம்பிகை] was taking a stroll in their garden with her famed father, Maraimalai Adigal (who at that time still went by his Sanskritic name, Swami Vedachalam [ வேதாசலம்]). He began to sing a verse from Ramalinga Adigal’s famous Tiruvarutpa [திருவருட்பா]; but when he came to the second line of the verse, Vedachalam stopped and said to his daughter:

“Is it not wonderful that Ramalinga Adigal has sung this song so beautifully in pure Tamil (tuyattamil)? But, instead of using the Sanskrit word tekam [தேகம்] in the second line, would it not have been better if he had used the pure Tamil (tanittamil) word, yakkai [யாக்கை]? Because Sanskrit words have been allowed in Tamil, it has lost its beauty and Tamil words have gone out of use.”

Father and daughter resolved, from that day on, to speak and write only in tanittamil [தனித் தமிழ்] (lit., “exclusively Tamil,” but more generally glossed as “pure Tamil”)  (Nilambikai 9960: iii).

This incident is cited as the originary moment of what comes to be called tanittamil iyakkam, the “pure Tamil” movement, and is dated by most scholars to 1916, though the roots of Maraimalai Adigal’s own personal predilections in this regard may be traced back to the late 1890s. The movement has invited considerable criticism and resistance, even within the devotional community. Nonetheless, it still continues to have its share of enthusiasts who publish books and journals advocating its virtues, and who seek, with varying degrees of success, to make tanittamil into an everyday habit in contemporary Tamilnadu.

For the ardent purist, there is no difference between “Tamil” and tanittamil; good Tamil is always already tanittamil, the only language in the world that is capable of flourishing without the aid of other languages (Nilambikai i960: 40-51). This has meant that for purists, even their fellow devotees who do not follow the ideals of tanittamil are, by definition, enemies of Tamil; they are not the true “sons” of their language/mother (Ilankumaran 1991: 130-36, 168-69).

 “Those who oppose tanittamil are murderers of Tamil,”

 the purists declare unequivocally (quoted in M. Tirunavukarasu 1959: 52.0).

Soon after the incident in the garden, Vedachalam Tamilized his name (and those of his children), and from then on referred to himself, at least in his Tamil publications, as Maraimalai Adigal. Vedachalam was not the first to do this."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 145. -- Fair use]

"It has been estimated that even at the height of Maraimalai Adigal’s enthusiasm for tanittamil in the 1930s, at least 5 percent of the words in his texts continued to be Sanskritic (Nambi Arooran 1976: 345-46). Nevertheless, even impressionistically speaking, the marked decline in the use of foreign words, especially of Sanskritic origin, in Tamil literary, scholarly, and even bureaucratic circles over the past half century is quite striking. The tanittamil movement, however, has paid less attention to excising foreign syntactic patterns and Sanskritic rules of compounding and suffixes, Sanskritic phraseology, and so on, all of which have arguably had a more enduring impact on Tamil literary and speech styles (Annamalai 1979: 48; Kailasapathy 1986: 30-31).

Even the most ardent of purists would readily admit that it has been impossible to totally cleanse Tamil, not least because no real criteria have been developed to determine what constitutes a “pure” Tamil word. Purists castigate the continued use of non-Tamil words in short stories, novels, newspapers, and cinema, and they lament that the earlier enslavement to Sanskrit has now been supplemented by dependence on English, especially in popular speech and culture. Such laments remind us that language purification efforts, not just in Tamilnadu but elsewhere in the world, are elite literary enterprises. Typically, they appear as an imposition of a norm from above, rather than as a manifestation of a need or sentiment from below. Purists like Maraimalai Adigal even insisted that it is indolence and lack of discipline among its speakers that was responsible for Tamil’s “corruption,” and that it was the duty of disciplined, alert literati to rectify this “problem.”

“Defiling one’s speech by mixing up with it extraneous elements simply indicates laxity of discipline, looseness of character, and lack of serious purpose in life,” he scolded (Maraimalai Adigal 1980: 32)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 146. -- Fair use]


Salem (Tamil சேலம்): Gründung der Tamil Scientific Terms Society


Subramaniya Bharati (Tamil: சுப்ரமணிய பாரதி - Cupramaṇiya pārati, 1882 - 1921): über Tamil und Hinduismus:

"A man who has pride in Tamil (tamilapimanam [தமிழபிமானம்]) is one who embraces Hinduism (hintu tarmam [ஹிந்து தர்மம்]). That alone will illuminate the path of the devotee of Tamil. For the man who does not care for the Tevaram, the Thiruvacakam, the Tiruvaymoli, the Tirukkural, and the Kamparamayanam has no claim to be a devotee of Tamil. One who knows these texts will realize that it is through Hinduism that this world will find salvation."
(Thooran 1986: 257)

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 53. -- Fair use]


Thanjavur (Tamil தஞ்சாவூர்): Es erscheint:

Abraham Pandithar (Tamil: ஆபிரகாம் பண்டிதர், 1859 – 1919): கருணாமிர்த சாகரம், என்னும் :  இசை தமிழ் நூல் = Karunāmirthasāgaram : a treatise on music or isait-Tamil . -- Thanjavur : Eigenverlag, 1917. -- 1208 S. : Ill. -- Online: Karunamirthasagaram ❤️ (17.16MB) ❤️ Free Download Tamil Books (

Abb.: Titelblatt von Book 2, 1946

"Abraham Pandither thus insisted in 1917:

“Those who realise the importance of the Tamil language know how it was pure and easy and unmixed and had attained a high state of excellence [on Lemuria].... But after the deluge, as the Tamilians spread over different regions and as people with different languages . . . mixed freely with them, the original grandeur of the language was lost.”

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 97f. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint:

P. V. Manickam Naiker (Tamil மாணிக்கம் நாய்க்கர் - Māṇikkam nāykkar, 1871 - 1931): The Tamil alphabet and its mystic aspect. -- Madras : Sabapathy, 1917. -- 91 S. Ill. -- Online: The Tamil Alphabet Its Mystic Aspect : Manickam Naicker : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Abb.: Titelblatt

"For the real lovers of the Tamil language and people, the investigation should be of paramount interest. That able North-Indian scholar Dutt speaks of a small band of Aryan settlers in the Indus valley some 3,000 years ago, of their manly habits of living without caste barriers as they exist to-day, of their next expansion into the Gangetic valley and the aryanisation of the aboriginal inhabitants there, of the aryanisation of the Maharattas next, and of the aryanisation of the South-Indians last. According to Dutt, the aryanisation of the last mentioned took place at a period when the steel walls separating the various castes did not exist, when the intrinsic value of each individual practically determined his caste and when the Dravidas had a civilisation of their own. Even should Dutt’s description of the aryanisation be true, the real Aryan corpus in South-India must now be next to nothing. A cranial study of the various classes of the South-Indians will also confirm the same. The lecturer, being a non-Brahmin, wishes to leave nothing to be misunderstood.

His best and tried friends are mostly Brahmins and he is a sincere admirer of them. There is no denying the fact that the ancestors of the present Brahmins were the most cultured among the South-Indians at the time the said aryanisation took place and hence got crystallised into a class revered by the people. As the cultured sons of the common mother Tamil, is it not their legitimate duty to own their kinsmen and to co-operate and uplift the less lucky brethren, if they have real patriotism for the welfare of our country ? On the contrary, the general disposition of many a Brahmin is to disown his kinship with the rest of his Tamil brethren, to disown his very mother Tamil and to construct an imaginary untainted Aryan pedigree as if the Aryan alone is heaven-born. Dutt himself complains of what he calls patriotism of even the western scholars who have a bias to trace the original home of the Aryans to Babylon or near the Baltic Sea. The few historians, archaeologists, and epigraphists we have in South-India are all Brahmins, and we must be proud of their erudite discourses. However, their general trend is to assume that they are themselves Aryans and not Tamils and to take as an axiom that Tamil and Tamils owe everything to Sanskrit. At least one of them is explicit in his endeavour to establish page after page and chapter after chapter, untainted Aryan pedigree for the Brahmins and Brahmins alone among the South-Indians. As such, he has naturally no scruples to say that the Tamils have nothing excellent or high which can be claimed as their own. Whatever is bad in them is their heritage and whatever is good they owe to Sanskrit. In answer to Dr. Caldwell’s observation that ‘ in one department at least, that of ethical apothegms, it is generally maintained that Sanskrit has been outdone by Tamil’ the author above referred to is “inclined to think that the existence of so many works on the ethics of daily life is an indication of the low state of morality among the early Tamils. Because it was the Dravidian whose teeth were blunted by the eating of flesh.

Pat II—117.

that required the advice,

In his zeal, he has however forgotten that after all he has not decried the greatness of Thiruvalluvar’s work, but has run amok amidst the Tamils generalising on the description of a no-class Tamilian of that age. It would have been fair if he had quoted side by side the couplet from the same Kurai.

and demonstrated equally graphically the fact that the Brahmins, the topmost class who ate the flesh of all animals in thousands under the guise of Vedic sacrifices required this advice from a Valluva Pariah, a no-class Tamilian. If be had avowed that he is a Tamil of Tamils, if he had owned his unlucky mother Tamil and yet made these observations, there will then be at the best the credit of confession, which too is due to a wrong conception.

Is not the rationalists’ motto that the past should be judged with the aid of the present, and the unknown should be judged with the aid of the known ? If so, we have before us the present standing instance of aryanisation by infusion of blood. It is only the Pariahs, the lowest, who submit themselves to be elevated in that manner and they produce the present Aryo-Tamilian or the Eurasian race of South-India. Even as a matter of sentiment which will not be found opposed to history, we will do well to consider aryanisation by culture and not by blood, and try to retain the integrity of the Brahmin and the Non-brahmin. The influx of the Aryan band from Central Asia into the Indus valley and their further migrations are not questioned. Were they aboriginal to Central Asia? Geologists tell us, that so late as the end of the Tertiary epoch, the whole expanse from the Chinese shore to the North Sea including the present Central Asia was one ocean and that the Central Asian tableland and the Himalayas were elevated long ages after the archaic beds of the South-Indian Peninsula came into existence. That the habitable condition of South-India dates back several geological ages beyond that of Central Asia and North-India can be verified even by a layman easily by comparing the elevations of the deltas of the Cauvery, the Krishna, the Godavery and the Ganges above the sea level. Though the Cauvery is a small river, the head of its delta is over 250 feet above the sea, whereas those of the other three larger rivers range between 36 and 60 feet, showing thereby the hoary antiquity of the South-Indian peninsula. Zoologists and Palaeontologists tell us that, in the development of species, South-India ranks clearly the first. They tell us further that the most probable home of the homo or generic man in the world was the submerged Tamilagam [தமிழகம்] or Limuria. If terrestrial life started so early as the Archean era in South-India under the most congenial climatic conditions for development of species, and went on developing without interruption by any serious geological commotion down to this date, and if such life started so late as the early Quaternary era in Central Asia under climatic conditions not so congenial to a rapid development of species it is hard to conceive how the Aryans sprang up there in Central Asia indigenously. Long after the great geological commotion at the end of the Tertiary era by which Central Asia was elevated the Quarternary man should have migrated gradually from South-India towards Central Asia. There was a minor commotion of the earth within historical times causing the further loss of the Southern peninsula into the sea and the elevation of the Central Indian plateau."

[a.a.O., S. 74 - 78]


Bezawada (Telugu విజయవాడ): Andhra Desa First Panchama Conference. Die Delegierten benennen die Konferenz um in Andhra Desa First Adi-Andhra Conference.

"After this Andhra conferences were held every year starting form village, taluk, district and regional levels. Their constant passing of resolutions in all the conferences, urging the government to label them as Adi-Andhras, Adi-Dravidas, as per the linguistic areas, forced the Madras legislative council adopt the resolution.
  1. That this council recommended to the Government that the term "panchama" or "paraya" used to designate the Ancient Dravidian community in Southern India should be deleted from Government records etc., and the term  Adi Dravida [ஆதி திராவிடர்] in the Tamil and 'Adi-Andhra' in Telugu Districts be substituted instead".
  2. On Behalf of the government an undertaking was given the government would have no objection to call the members of this community. 'Adi-Dravida' in Tamil, 'Adi-Andhra' inTelugu districts and particular members of the community 'Dravidas', if they prefer to be so called, but it would not be possible to re-edit old records. The government accordingly direct that the following terms shall in future be adopted in place of 'panchama' or 'paraya' or similar terms in all official documents."

[Quelle: Encyclopedia of Dalits in India / ed. Sanjay Paswan [Hindi संजय पासवान, 1962 - ] ; Pramanshi Jaideva [Hindi प्रमांशी जयदेव]. -- Dehli : Kalpaz. -- Vol. 10: 2002. -- S. 114. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint das Tamil Gedicht:

Subramaniya Bharati (Tamil: சுப்ரமணிய பாரதி, 1882 - 1921): Good old Tamil-land:

1.    When the words resound,
'Good old Tamil-Land!'
Dulcet streams of honey
Flow into our ear:
When the words resound,
'Land of all our sires!'
A potent power indeed
Is born in our breath.

When the words.....

2.  Filled with Vedic lore,
Is our Tamil-Land:
Packed with chivalry
Is our Tamil-Land:
Maidens making love
Like celestial nymphs
Teem on every side
In our Tamil-Land.

When the words ....

3.    The Kaveri, the South Pennar,
And the
Palar river,
And the
Vaikai, witness of gloried Tamil
And the Porunai river,
All these famous streams
Flow through and nourish
The rich and fair terrain
Of our Tamil-Land.

When the words

4. The lofty mountain range
Of Triple-Tamil’s sage
Stands as a mighty guard
Of our Tamil-Land.
The various riches which abound
Upon this spacious earth
Are all found together
In our Tamil-Land.

When the words

5. One border is the edge
Of the blue ocean’s wave,
Where the virgin Goddess stands
Ever in penance rare;
At the north is Vishnu’s Hill:
Between these borders two
Compact of boundless fame
Is our Tamil-Land.

When the words

6.  It gave Valluvar the Great
For all the world to have:
 And the fame rose sky high
Of our Tamil-Land.
It made a necklace of gems,
Named ’The Lay of the Anklet’
Which grips enraptured hearts
In our Tamil-Land.

When the words

7.  Of those that went to Ceylon,
And to
Pushpaka, and Java,
And many other islands too,
And settled as dwellers there
Planting their countries' flags
Blazoned with the Tiger, and the Fish,
And made them stand supreme,
This is the Mother land.

When the words ....

8.  They are the men of might
Who dared to dash against
The hills of the Himalayan range
Whose heads knock at heaven:
They once waged a fierce war
Kalinka's might,
They the stable Tamil Kings
Of our Tamil-Land

When the words ....

9. The fame spread far and wide
Among the Chinese, and the Egyptians,
And in the Greek and Arab homelands,
And in other lands as well,
Of their Arts, and Mystic Wisdom,
And techniques of War and Trade,
For these were nurtured well indeed
In our Tamil-Land

When the words....

P.N.A. [Übersetzung: Thiru P.N.Appuswami]

Note: The Tamil original forms part of Nattu-p-pattu published in 1919 by Parali Su. Nellai Appar.

[Quelle: Bharati Patalkal : Tamil University Thanjavur Tamilnadu India : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint das Tamil Gedicht:

Subramaniya Bharati (Tamil: சுப்ரமணிய பாரதி, 1882 - 1921): தமிழ் (Tamil)

1.  Of all the tongues that I have sampled.
For sweetness Tamil’s unexampled:
But now become illiterate mutes
Our lives are worse than those of brutes;
Grown recreant to our ancient trust
Our treasures in a heap have gone to rust.
Tamil's mellifluous sounds
Must reach the world's utmost bounds,
If we are to lift our heads again,
Instead of wasting our time in vain.

2. Of all the bards that I’ve explored
None in the world are richer-ored
Kamban, Valluvar, Ilankovan, --
Immortal trinity — our own
This is the truth unvarnished, plain, —
Free from all vainglorious strain.
Deaf, dumb and blind wretches we live, —
We can’t our greatness e’er revive
So long as our native virile speech
Is not allowed much wider reach.

3.  To enrich, refine and modernise
Our tongue, new writers must arise;
 Translations too we must produce
From foreign classics for our use.
What boots it if we idly prate
Of our glorious past in our present state?
The world will recognize our worth
 If genius midst us gain takes birth.

4. Unless our hearts by truth are lighted,
Our speech with wings will not be flighted.
Self-purified we then may strive
Our arts and poetry to revive.
Then our renascence in a flood,
Will lead us into a world of good.
The blind long fallen in the ditch
Will be blessed with vision strange and rich,
And rise with the rise of Tamil strains
Chronicling our varied gains.
Like gods assuming human birth
We’d then live glorious on earth.

- P.M. [Übersetzung: Prof. P. Mahadevan]

Note: The Tamil original forms part of  Nattu-p-pattu.

[Quelle: Bharati Patalkal : Tamil University Thanjavur Tamilnadu India : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Subramaniya Bharati (Tamil: சுப்ரமணிய பாரதி, 1882 - 1921) in einem Tamil Gedicht:

Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] spricht:

"The primordial Shiva gave birth to me;
The Aryan son
Agastya saw me and took delight;
That Brahman endowed me with a grammar, complete and perfect.
(Bharati 1987: 529)"

"“Tamil will die a slow death
The languages of the West will triumph in this world.”
So says the simpleton;
Alas! what an accusation!
Go forth in all eight directions!
Bring back here the wealth of all learning!
By the grace of my father, and the penance of our learned scholars, this great taint will be effaced,
With lofty fame I shall last forever in this world!
(Bharati 1987: 531)"

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 51f;. -- Fair use]


Tirunelveli (Tamil திருநெல்வேலி): Gründung der South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society Ltd. (Tamil சைவ சித்தாந்த நூற்பதிப்புக் கழகம் - Caiva cittānta nūṟpatippuk kaḻakam)


Tod von J. M. Nallaswami Pillai (Tamil நல்லசுவாமி பிள்ளை, 1864 - 1920)

"J M Nallaswami Pillai was a contemporary of Vedanayagam Pillai (1826-1889) and Dr U V Swaminatha Iyer (1855-1941). He was a multi-faceted genius and his wide ranging literary activities as a powerful writer, translator and propagandist of Saiva Siddhanta were mainly responsible for re-kindling the revival of academic interest in Saiva Siddhanta in Europe and America in the first decade of 20th century. He was acknowledged by all his contemporaries as an outstanding authority on the philosophical works known as Saiva Siddhanta Sastras. By his translations of nine (9) of the fourteen (14) books coming under this category and by his authoritative commentaries and essays on the Saiva Siddhanta he become, probably, the most voluminous writer on that philosophical system in the English language.

Nallaswami Pillai was born in a respectable Vellala Family at Trichirappalli on 24 November, 1864. He came from a very influential family, many of whose ancestors had held high official positions under the Carnatic Nawabs. His father was Manickam Pillai who was employed as a Clark in the District Police Office at Tiruchirappalli. He studied at SPG High School in Tiruchirappalli, passing the Matriculation Examination with Distinction in 1879. He then went to SPG College, Tiruchirappali for his Intermediate College Education.

His College Principal Mr. C.W. Pearco, an Englishman, was the first recognize the genius of Nallaswami Pillai and described him as 'a radical student'. He passed his Intermediate Examination in First Class obtaining the First Rank in 1881. Soon thereafter he joined the Presidency College, Madras in 1881 and passed his B.A. with distinction in 1884. What is significant is that he took up Logic and Philosophy as his special subjects in his BA Class and this academic training turned out to be a great asset in his activities as a Philosopher and Religious Savant in his later years. Two distinguished Professors of Presidency College Dr D Duncan and Mr Bilderbeck rated Nallaswami Pillai as 'An outstanding Scholar with an incisive mind with concern for minuteness and exactness'.

In 1884, he was married to Lakshmi Ammal who was the daughter of one of his relations called Parasurama Pillai of Tiruchirappali. He led the ideal life of a Grihasta.

After qualifying for Law from the Madras Law College, he enrolled himself as a High Court 'Vakil' in 1887 and worked as a junior under Sir S. Subramania Aiyar, at Madurai. Sir S. Subramania Aiyar was a leader of the Madurai Bar then. Apart from devoting himself to his legal work and public affairs, Nallaswami Pillai started concentrating on the study and discussion of Religious and Philosophical Subject, particularly Saiva Siddhanta.

Nallaswami Pillai was elected as Member of the Madurai Municipal Council. His brilliance as a Lawyer was noticed by Mr. Ross, I.C.S. who was then the District and Sessions Judge at Madurai. On his recommendation, Nallaswami was recruited to the Judiciary in 1893 as District Munsif, in which capacity he served for 20 years in various places. Though he became a District Munsif early in his life, he was not one of those routine beings who get lost in a job without regard for the finer instincts of a nobler and detached life. He early in his life he had developed a proper perspective on all aspects of leading a meaningful life with a balanced sense of proportion.

Nallaswami Pillai resigned from his Judicial post and reverted to the Bar in Madurai in 1912. He continued his practise as a Lawyer at Madurai till his death in 1920 at the comparatively early age of 56.

Nallaswami Pillai is best remembered as a Tamil Savant, whose writings on the Saiva Siddhanta Philosophy have an enduring value. He came early under the influence of the writings of Arumuga Navalar of Jaffna and Somasundara Nayagar of Madras, two of the most powerful champions of Saiva revivalism of the last century.

In 1895 Nallaswami Pillai published his English translation and exposition of Sivagnana Bodham of Meikanda Devar, a short work of twelve sutras, with explanatory prose and some illustrative stanzas. The Sivaghana Bodham is considered to be the most authentic Saiva Siddhanta scripture for which a most brilliant and authoritative commentary was written by Sivagnana Swamigal in the 18th century. It is known as the 'Mapadiyam' (Tamil form of Mahabhashyam). Nallaswami Pillai's translation and exposition are based on this commentary. In the sixties of the 19th century an English translation of this work was published by Rev. Hoisington but it did not attract as much notice as that of Nallaswami Pillai's which was better in every respect.

Nallaswami Pillai's English translation of Sivagnana Bodam in 1895, attracted worldwide attention in the West. In this book he wrote:

'Sivagnana Bodham is a unique book of unrivalled compression of words and ideas alike.Its terseness of diction and brevity of expression will baffle the powers of exposition and beggar the attempts at translation by even the biggest of Tamil Pundits.'

In June 1897, in commemoration of the Diamond Jubilee of the accession of the Queen Empress Victoria to the British throne, Nallaswami Pillai started a monthly journal called the SIDDHANTA DIPIKA OR THE LIGHT OF TRUTH at Madras.

Writing in the first issue on 'OUR AIMS' he said:

'We have considered it a shame that we should be coached in our Vedas and Vedanta by German Professors on the banks of the Rhine in Europe and that an American from a far off country should be the first translator of the foremost work in Tami Philosophy and that an old Oxford Professor like Dr G U Pope should sit poring over the Tamil 'WORD' and render into English verse. Far from condemning such noble examples which redound greatly to the glory of the European, I would say 'Noble examples they! May we follow! Our journal will devote itself to bring out translations of rare works in Sanskrit and Tamil, Literary, Philosophical and Religious, will devote its pages to a more critical and historical study of Indian Religious Systems, to develop a taste for and to induce a proper and more appreciative cultivation of our Indian Classical and Vernacular Languages and Literature. Greater attention will be paid to the language and history of South India and the Dravidian Philosophy and Religion will find their best exposition in its pages and in this respect it is intended to supply a real and absolutely felt public want.'

Nallaswami Pillai also published English translations of Tirumular's great poem Tirumantiram and nine of the Siddhanta works in his monthly magazine Siddhanta Dipika. They were all published under his personal guidance for 14 years from 1897 to 1911 for popularising Tamil Classics and Saiva Siddhanta Philosophy among the English knowing public. He wrote many essays on the various aspects of this system, which were later, collected and published as a book under the title 'Studies in the Saiva Siddhanta', which shows his power as a lucid thinker and forceful and dignified controversialist.

His magnum opus, however, was his English translation of the Sivagnana Siddhiyar with a commentary, which, though based on earlier works was singularly profound. This appeared in a serial form for several years in the Siddhanta Dipika and was later published in a book form in 1913 with a learned introduction. The author of Sivagnana Sidhiyar was Arulnandi Sivacharya who was a most learned Vedic and Agamic Brahmin Scholar of his age. He became a disciple of the young Vellala saint Meikanda Devar, considering him to be an illumined soul and set an example of totally ignoring caste in the religious and spiritual field, which was followed by the equally great Umapathy Sivacharya. There had been an earlier translation of the Sivagnana Siddhiyar by Dr. Graul, a German scholar but it was only a pioneer attempt, which was replaced by Nallaswami Pillai's more accurate and brilliant translation...

In the Convention of Religions held at Calcutta in 1907 and at Allahabad in 1911, it was Nallaswami Pillai who was the spokesman for Saivism and the Siddhanta philosophy and delivered stirring addresses.

The value of his works was recognised and their entire copyright was acquired by the Dharmapuram Mutt, which has published a few of his works. A collection of all his English writings including his translations of the religious books, if brought out in a single well-edited volume, will show the wide range of his learning, the strength of his intellect and the tireless and devoted work, which he did for popularising the Saiva Siddhanta philosophy and establish his lasting fame as the most well read and level headed Saiva Siddhanta scholar of his age."


  • English Translation of Sivagnana Bodham, 1895
  • Light of Truth or Siddhanta Deepika.(An English Monthly), First Series Vols. I to VI, 1897
  • சித்தாந்த தீபிகை - உண்மை விளக்கம், Volume 1
  • English Translation of Sivagnana Siddhiar 1897
  • Cameos from Tamil Literature, 1897
  • English Translation of Tirumular's Thimantiram,1897
  • English Translation of Unmai Vilakkam ,1902
  • Siddhanta Deepika and Agamic Review, Second Series Vols. II to XIV. 1906-1914
  • English Translation of Sri Kanta Bashyam 1906
  • English Translation of Siddhanta Gnana Ratnavali, 1907
  • English Translation of Dravida Maha Bashyam, 1907
  • Studies in Saiva Siddhanta (A Collection of Essays in English) 1911
  • Sekkizhars Life of Salva Saints in English,1912
  • English Translation of Irupa - lrupahdo , 1912
  • English Translation of Vina Venba, 1913
  • English Translation of Kodi Kavi, 1914

[Quelle: V. S. Sundaram: J.M.Nallaswami Pillai - One Hundred Tamils of 29th Century ( -- Zugriff am 2021-10-21. -- Fair use]


Swaminatha Upatiyayan in einem Tamil Buch über "Shaivism and Tamil language":

“In the whole wide world, there is no greater god than Paramashivam [Shiva]; no religion loftier than Shaivism; no land more superior to the Tamil land; no language more divine than Tamil . . . and no people more auspiciously pure than Tamilians” (Swaminatha Upatiyayan 1921: 20).

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 32. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint:

Maraimalai_Adigal  (Tamil மறைமலை அடிகள், 1876 - 1950): அறிவுரைக் கொத்து (Ratschläge)

Darin: தமிழ்நாட்டவரும் (Sotheners and Westeners):

"This issue, glossed as tamil aruccanai [தமிழ் அருச்சனை ] (Tamil worship), turned around the use of Tamil and its religious texts in temples in Tamilnadu where Sanskrit was still the dominant liturgical language. Neo-Shaivism insisted that in ancient Shaiva religion, it was Tamil, rather than Sanskrit, that was used as language of worship. But then

“[Brahmans] introduced the words of their northern language in which one can see very little trace of any kind of divinity, empowered them, and denigrated our great and glorious Tamil scriptures, the Tevaram and the Tiruvacakam, as ‘songs of the Shudras’ ” (Maraimalai Adigal 1967a: 150)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 138. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Tod des nationalistischen Dichters Subramaniya Bharati (Tamil: சுப்ரமணிய பாரதி - Cupramaṇiya Pārati, 1882 - 1921). Seine Werke haben großen Einfluss auf Narendra Modi (Gujarati: નરેંદ્ર દામોદરદાસ મોદી, 1950 - ).

Wikipedia: / -- Zugriff am 2018-05-17

Abb.: Briefmarke, 1960
[Wikimedia / GODL]

Subramania Bharathi
Born 11 December 1882

EttayapuramEttaiyapuram estateBritish India

Died 12 September 1921 (aged 38)

MadrasMadras PresidencyBritish India
(present-day Tamil Nadu, India)

Other names Bharathi, Subbaiah, Sakthi Dasan, Mahakavi, Mundasu Kavignar, Veera Kavi, Selly Dasan
Citizenship British Raj
Occupation Journalist, poet, writer, teacher, patriot, freedom fighter
Movement Indian independence movement
Spouse(s) Chellamma/Kannamma (m. 1896–1921)
Children 2

Englische Übersetzung seiner Gedichte: Bharati Patalkal : Tamil University Thanjavur Tamilnadu India : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"He was born Chinnaswami Subramania (1882-1921) in a Brahmin family in a Tinnevelly town we have encountered before, Ettayapuram, but teachers who admired the eleven-year-old’s facility for lyrics named him Bharati, a synonym for Saraswati, the goddess of learning.

Interested also in languages, the boy was soon fluent, apart from Tamil, in Sanskrit, English and Hindi, perhaps helped with the last by an early journey to Varanasi.

In 1904, he joined the Swadesamitran in Madras, working for eighteen months as a sub-editor and translator under G. Subramania Iyer, the forceful editor. Influenced or encouraged by Iyer, Bharati attended three Congress sessions, in Varanasi in 1905, Calcutta in 1906, and Surat in 1907. In Calcutta, Vivekananda’s Irish disciple, Sister Nivedita as she was called, inspired Bharati, and he acquired a smattering of Bengali.

Along with Bharati in Surat was VOC [V. O. Chidambaram Pillai], who was older to him by ten years. Sharing similar interests and views, the two had become close friends. When the Congress split in Surat, Bharati had no hesitation in siding with the extremists led by Tilak, Aurobindo and VOC.

In journals, in Madras, now edited by Bharati—interestingly, the Tamil one was called India and the English journal Bala Bharatam (Young Bharat)—he defended the extremists and mocked the moderates, including in cartoons. The latter were a new feature in South Indian journalism, with Bharati usually conceiving a cartoon and hiring an artist to sketch it.

Like VOC, Bharati responded with intensity in 1907 to Bipin Chandra Pal’s speeches in Madras, and he seems to have made popular orations of his own on the beach. The Tinnevelly artist, a master of romantic and mystical poetry, who ‘transmuted vague feelings of Tamil patriotism into lyric expression’, was now on fire as an activist.

However, preferring exile in Pondicherry to arrest in Madras, he moved in 1908 to the French territory, where he read, composed anew, or translated texts such as the Gita, Bankim’s ‘Vande Mataram’ song, and pieces by Tagore, into Tamil verse or prose. He remained in Pondicherry during World War I, interacting on occasion with other eminent exiles, including Aurobindo.

The Pondicherry years were financially hard, and callers found Bharati agitated. A correspondent of The Hindu who met Bharati in the French territory was struck by the poet’s ‘manner of speaking’. Apparently Bharati would suddenly stand up in the middle of a conversation, or suddenly sit down, and ‘thump’ with passion.

In November 1918, when the war ended, he ventured out of the French territory. Detained in nearby Cuddalore, he was released after three weeks—the result, apparently, of an intervention by an Irishwoman who had made India her home—Annie Besant.

In Madras in the following year, when Gandhi visited the south, his host, Chakravarti Rajagopalachari Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, introduced Bharati to him as ‘our national bard’. Patriotic verses, devotional, philosophical and autobiographical ones, verses narrating great stories—Bharati had written them all.

But Madras, where he lived in a house in Triplicane, seemed to neglect him. Bharati was only thirty-nine when he died there in September 1921, the eventual result, it was said, of an injury received from a temple elephant he had regularly fed. Not many mourners joined the funeral of one after whom cities across India would later name streets.

Renaming a street would prove easier than translating the poet. In 2012, his granddaughter S. Vijaya Bharati, a scholar herself, would write in evident distress:

As far as English is concerned, Bharati has never found a good translator. I have been reading translations of Bharati’s poems by various authors over the past four decades, and I have yet to see a satisfactory translation of Bharati."

[Quelle: Rajmohan Gandhi (Hindi राजमोहन गांधी, 1935 - ): Modern South India : A history from the 17th century to our times. -- New Delhi : Aleph, 2018. -- S. 240ff. -- Fair use]

"“In Tamilnadu, Tamil ought to be preeminent. All over India, may Sanskrit flourish, as it always has. To accomplish the unification of our Indian nation, everyone should know Sanskrit. Nonetheless, in Tamilnadu, Tamil should flourish with great eminence” (Bharati 1988: 22.9)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 49. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint das folgende Tamil Gedicht von Namakkal V. Ramalingam (Tamil நாமக்கல் கவிஞர் வெ. இராமலிங்கம் பிள்ளை - Nāmakkal Kaviñar Ve. Irāmaliṅkam Piḷḷai,, 1888 - 1972):

"Intiyattāy [Tamil இந்தியத்தாய் = Mutter Indien] languishes in sorrow, and you speak of your own community!
That is disgraceful!
O Tamilian, break the chains that enslave that venerable woman ... !
Long live the Tamil land!
May our Tamil language flourish, so that our Intiyattay who supports us may find fulfillment.
(Ramalinga Pillai 1988: 29)"

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 48. -- Fair use]


Tirunelveli (Tamil திருநெல்வேலி):  Es erscheint die Tamil Zeitschrift zu செந்தமிழ் - Centamiḻ = Reinem Tamil


செந்தமிழ் செல்வி (Centamiḻ celvi) / hrsg von South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society Ltd., Tinnevelly, Ltd. -- Heft 1974-01 online: * (

Abb.: Titelblatt von Jahrgang XLIX, 1974
[Fair use]



Es erscheint:

Thiru._V._Kalyanasundaram (Tamil திரு. வி. கலியாணசுந்தரனார் - Tiru. Vi. Kaliyāṇacuntaraṉār, 1883 - 1953):  தாய்மொழி - Tāymoḻi [Muttersprache]. -- in: நவசக்தி (Navasakti)

“What is the condition of our mother tongue, Tamil, today? Where is Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil]? Does she adorn the seat of government? Does she preside over our associations? Does she flourish in our legislative chambers? Can we at least see her in our schools and colleges? Can we spot her in those political bodies that claim to fight for our rights? At the least, is there a place for her in Tamil newspapers?”

(Kalyanasundaranar 1935: 19).

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 47. -- Fair use]

What is the condition of our mother tongue, Tamil, today? Where is Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil]? Does she adorn the seat of government? Does she preside over our associations? Does she flourish in our legislative chambers? Can we at least see her in our schools and colleges? Can we spot her in those political bodies that claim to fight for our rights? At the least, is there a place for her in Tamil newspapers?”

(Kalyanasundaranar 1935: 19).

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 47. -- Fair use]

"Every man reveres the woman who gives birth to him, the nation (natu [நாடு]) where he was born, and the language he speaks, by referring to these as his “mother.” As much as the love he has for the mother who carried him, ought to be his love for the nation that delivers him, and the language that rears him. A man who does not revere his nation and his language is like the sinner who does not reverence his own mother. Indeed, the language that one speaks is the very wellspring of the love for one’s mother, and of devotion to one’s motherland. A man who is not devoted to the mother tongue he speaks is a man who has reviled his own mother and his own nation."
(Kalyanasundaranar 1935: 19)

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 58. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): S. Ramanathan (Tamil எஸ். இராமநாதன் - Es. Irāmanātaṉ, 1895 - 1970) gründet das Self-Respect Movement (Tamil சுயமரியாதை இயக்கம் - Cuyamariyātai iyakkam)

Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973), der Anführer des Self-Respect Movement schreibt darüber:


I started a movement and named it as the ‘Self-Respect Movement’ in 1925. It is known to all. I am bound to state why it was started. Many may like to know the objectives of the movement. At the outset, I must say a few words about myself. Then only it will be possible to conclude whether what I did was right or wrong.

I had no feelings about caste or religion from my childhood days. In other words I did not follow them. But when circumstances forced me I pretended to observe them. Similarly I had no faith in God. In all matters I did, I never thought whether God would punish me! I did not do anything thinking that it would please God. In my early years, I had no remembrance I have ever believed in god or religion or caste really! I have to reminiscence about this many times in the past also. I do not know as to when I really lost faith in all these.


When I was just six years old, I was sent to a pial school. It was just at a short distance from my home in Erode. Around the school there were few houses inhabited by Chettiars, trading in oil. Oil mills were working always. A few people residing on platforms were manufacturing mats and baskets out of bamboo. Some Muslims too were residing in that area. It was clear that Chettiars, bamboo article makers and Muslims were dwelling in that area.

In those days, other caste people would not take any food in their houses. So before sending me to school I was advised not to move with these people. I was strictly warned not to eat or drink in their houses. If at all I felt thirsty, I was asked to take water from the teacher’s house. The teacher was a strict vegetarian. He belonged to a caste called ‘Odhuvar’. In his house a small girl used to place a brass tumbler on the ground, and pour water into it. I was instructed to lift the vessel and drink without sipping. After drinking I was asked to keep the vessel upside down. After that she would pour water on the vessel, lift it and then take it into the house. That was the normal practice adopted in those days by high-caste Hindus to 'purify’ the vessel touched by a person belonging to a low-caste.

Because I was not allowed to sip water from the vessel, a part of the water would fall on my body. Only a little water would go into the mouth. Some times water would enter my nose and cause trouble. I had to spit out water instantly. Sometimes the girl would get angry on seeing this. So I decided not to take water from the house of the teacher.

The boys of Vaniya Chettiar community never went to the teacher’s house for drinking water. They will stand in the class, show their thumbs and the teacher would let them go out and return soon. They would take water from the Chettiars’ houses nearby.

One day I thought that I could join them and take water in a Chettiar’s house. When a Chettiar boy showed his thumb I also stood up and showed my thumb. The teacher permitted both of us to leave the class. The teacher asked me where I was running to. “For drinking water” I replied. “Are you going with him?” asked my Master. So I went to the teacher’s house. When I returned, my body was wet. My dhotis too were partly drenched in water. Next day I decided to accompany a Chettiar boy for drinking water. I made the necessary arrangement previously. I stood up in the class first and showed my pointing finger as though I am going out to pass urine. The teacher nodded his head. I went out and stood behind the house of the teacher. The Chettiar boy took the permission from the teacher to quench his thirst. He came out. We both joined together and ran up to his house. He brought me a glass of water.


I drank that water by sipping, as I would do in my house. Seeing this the lady of the house asked me whether I would not be punished for drinking water in her house. I said no one in my house would take me to task. She asked my friend Palaniappan to wash the glass I used. Then I ran back to the school.

On another occasion I drank the water in the house of a person who made bamboo articles. Gradually I began to taste the dishes prepared in their houses. Somehow this matter reached my house. At that time my family was very rich. Our people were observing the rituals like orthodox Brahmins. Always there was talk of divinity in my house. But my father was not much worried. He simply chided me saying ‘ Don’t behave like that again.’ But my mother was very much perturbed. She would feel as though she had lost something precious. But nothing stood in my way. I even ate whatever the Muslim boys offered me. My parents came to know about this also. By this time my school career was stopped. I was then only ten years old.

I was very closely associated with those with whom I should not. I was not expected to move freely. My close movement with communities, which were considered low and despicable, was the main impediment to my education. I was considered to be a ruffian because of my movements and behaviour. My feet were chained to logs of wood. Yet I used to move about with my usual company. This continued for fifteen days!. I used to carry the logs on my shoulder and go about on my usual rounds. At last I was taken away from that school and sent to a government school. Even there I was stopped in two years. I was only 12 years at that time.


I was sent to our own business shop. My work was to mark the bags and auction the goods. During my leisure time, I took keen interest in discussing the puranas (mythologies). In those days Sanyasis (Saints), Bhagavathars, religious mendicants had great sway over our family. I disliked them. I used to heckle them and make fun of what they said. I used to pester them with questions and make them feel embarrassed. Gradually this practice led to my taking interest in chatting. This also helped me to spend my leisure time usefully. In fact this practice gave me lively interest.

Moreover the religious pundits (scholars) of Vaishnavism and Saivism were performing ‘Kalatshepams’ (Story Discourse with songs) in our house. This was done to gain a status and name in the society, as my family was rolling in money. My mother used to hear the religious discourses with devotion. My father was simply pleased with all these. So far as I was concerned, I naturally, learnt all about the Hindu religion and its puranas. I used to put a volley of questions to the pundits. For some, they struggled to answer. Different pundits gave different clarifications. This made me more enthusiastic and incisive. Neighbours were struck with my intelligence. Though sometimes my father felt annoyed, in his heart of hearts, he appreciated my brilliance.

Out of all these I began to lose faith in castes, religions, God and Sastras (Hindu Doctrines).


It is said that one’s association and surrounding, give scope to the individual to determine one’s life, mission and ideals. By experience it may be true. But in no field of activity I was influenced by association or surrounding. On the contrary I was never a victim of my surrounding and association . Let me explain this further. When I was in my youth I was surrounded by friends who were mostly accustomed to drink. This was during the period when I was 20 to 30 years of age. Further the government officers, Zamindars and Mirasdars who were very affectionate also had the habit of consuming liquor. Many nights I used to enjoy their Company and take leave of them in the morning. Every night I used to spend Rs.40, 50,60 on liquor like brandy. I would myself mix the liquor with soda in glasses and offer them as a mark of respect. When they got intoxicated some of them used to spit the liquor on me. On one occasion, a deputy collector and a salt commissioner pushed me to the ground and forcibly tried to pour liquor into my mouth. I say this to prove that association or surrounding had no power to influence me, I never had the interest to taste any liquor. Yet my wife used to suspect me because of my association and surroundings. She would ask me to open my mouth and try to smell whether I had consumed any liquor. Then only she would be satisfied.

Inspite of my being associated with this sort of society, I was very successful in my business. My father reposed great confidence in me. He removed the name board of the shop bearing his name and replaced it with my name. Even in public matters he deputed me to represent him.

The works of temples and devasthanams were conducted as if they were purely personal affairs In this aspect also my father made me prominent. By doing this, he expected a change in my life. He might have thought that I would become religious and have faith in god.

I acted as the secretary and president of the Devasthana-Committee.


While the matters were such, whatever responsibility I accepted, I did the duties as they should be done. Even in matters which I disbelieved, I was very honest, sincere and more careful.

My real interest and resolve slowly grew towards eradicating the evils of caste and religion. Even in that lofty ideal, I did not deem that I would be the only fit person to do it. Somehow we were leading a very happy life. Without depending on anyone for anything our family flourished. What else is needed for a happy life. In other words, a man needs a healthy body and determination to work hard for his ideals. He should not be lazy or dependent on others for anything.

One should not change or give up his ideals for selfish gains or for getting the favour of others. A man must have such a freedom to pursue his ideals till his death.

I think I had that freedom and unique status. It is this freedom I enjoy and values most, that enables me to pursue my ideals. I am in no way blindly resolute.

If my senses are sensitive at the time of my death, I would feel happy about my life and die peacefully. I will be completely satisfied. I will not have any grouse or complaint. I will not feel that I have left anything unfinished.

Because I am alive, my life must have some work. There is no life without work. My mission was decided by me. I resolved to eradicate the evils of casteism. I decided to crusade against god and superstitions. My aim was to work with interest for the welfare of the society. I do, what all I can to better the society. When this feeling gradually developed, I took it as my full time life-work to reform the society.


I started the Self-Respect Movement with the same motive. If my ambition is fulfilled the class hatred in society will cease. Individuals will have no grievances. All these may exist in society merely for recreation! Even as people play or gamble on holidays, meet with dejection, worries, dissatisfaction, by nature’s action the society may be unnecessarily annoyed. It is common not only to human beings but to all living beings. So any man will have to face the good and the bad in life. With awareness of this I have launched the movement. This is otherwise interpreted as ‘Nish Kamiya Karma’, that is discharging duties without expecting good reward. Why should any one do so? When a man does something expecting some good, he will have to meet with worries. But in reality a living being has to choose some work or other. I have undertaken the Self-Respect movement as the work for me in life. But in this work I did not get myself dejected. It always gives me interest.

The philosophy of Self-Respect Movement is known to the world. The cause and effect theory is accepted by the wise world. The human being seeks the reasons for everything. He has begun to conduct research of nature. A life with ignorance is considered as a slave’s life. This is the doctrine of Self-Respect Movement. Before doing anything, one should think whether it is right or wrong, see the causes, analyse things, do research, and respect the truths. This is what the Self-Respect means. Freedom and Self-Respect are closely related.

Those who are for freedom today are neglecting the self-respect and human dignity of man. This is nothing but absurd. Without self-respect there will be no good of freedom.

It is the self-respect ideal that commands feelings of freedom. The freedom of the self-respect prevails strikingly. But the freedom of the real freedom lovers will not be clear even to himself. Even if he understands, it may be only in the case of particular thing.


For example, take the concept of political freedom. Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jawaharlal are the two luminaries in politics.

Gandhi says, revitalising Hinduism and old method of Varnasharma Dharma (Code of Casteism) is freedom. Deliverance from British rule is considered as freedom. Prevalent sorrows in the human society can not be wiped out because, that freedom will create more problems than solve some. It is said that British subjects enjoy the greatest freedom. But you know the king himself had to abdicate the crown to marry the lady he loved and that too it was precipitated by the so-called elected representatives. If it is so, do you believe that there will be any self-respect in the freedom of Gandhi or Nehru? Do you think the British king would have forfeited the right to marry, if there was self-respect with freedom? There is nothing so precious to man in life as self-respect and basic human right.

Though the Self-Respect Movement made a very humble beginning, it had to face many obstacles and repression. At many stages, there were critical dangers. Why? The Self-Respect Movement has created a stir in Tamil Nadu, Malayala Nadu, Andhra Nadu in the social sphere. It has made Gandhi also do somersaults. Men are now demanding rights. High and low caste significations are fast fading away. Bible and Quran are now given new interpretations. If only congress had not counteracted, the Self-Respect Movement would have spread even throughout the length and breadth of India. Brahminism would have been completely routed and effaced out of existence.

We are going to propagate the ideals all over India. Now our youths are eager to undertake the task.

Youths, get ready for the task!


Religion is the sum of the rules related to cooperative living and code of conduct needed for a society. Self-Respect Movement is not against such a harmonious society. Even if it is said that religion is needed to reach god we will not interfere. It is after all an individual’s personal affair.

But, if religion destroys the wisdom in the society, if it endangers the self-respect, if humanity is differentiated as high and low, if it brings disunity and demolishes freedom, our Self-Respect Movement will not leave it. Take for example numerous religions. Let us not worry about the religions of foreigners. Let us consider Hinduism, which is said to be our religion of India.

Is there any other reason for Indians to be so disunited? Is not Hinduism responsible for the creation of so many divisions and differences? Is not Hinduism responsible for the creation of so many castes, that too some as high and some as low? The Vedas and Sastras (Hindu Doctrines) prove these. If we are to get rid of castes and un-touchability without converting to other religions like Islam, think over whether anyone else except Brahmin is enjoying so much facility and freedom in social and economic fields. What else is needed to prove that Hindu religion should be destroyed? No one thinks about what religion has done to humanity.

The evils caused by the intoxicating drinks are lesser, when compared to the evils caused by religious fanaticism. Liquor spoils only when consumed. Religion spoils you the moment you think of it.

Religion not only creates the high and low discrimination in our social life, but also establishes high and low discrimination in our economy. Think over!. Has not religion created a separate class of people who are hard working and a separate class of people who enjoy without any hard work?

The wealth of the world is denied to the toiling masses. Lazy fellows who do not exert or work are able to enjoy the wealth of the world. Is it not because of religion? Common man is in poverty. He is made a slave, a low caste and heinous human being. Those who have got exemption to work by religion are free from worries and are able to amass wealth and subordinate all others on account of this religion.


Birds, animals, worms, which are considered to be devoid of rationalism do not create castes, differences as high and low, in their own species. But man considered to be a rational being is suffering from all these because of religion.

Amongst dogs you don’t have a brahmin dog and pariah (untouchable) dog. Among donkeys and monkeys we do not find. But amongst men you have. Why? Is it not because of our religion? How many years old is Hinduism? What good has it done to Society so far.? The low caste existed even in the days of Rama who was considered as an incarnation of god. In the days of King Harichander there existed a Pariah (Untouchable) in the burial ground. Selling away one’s wife too was prevalent. To this day these evils are seen in our society. How are we to say that Hindu religion helped the people to progress?

See, what foolish notions are taught to the people by religion. The dead bodies are burnt to ashes and the ashes are immersed in water. But they are believed to be alive. The descendants of the dead hand over rice, dholl, vegetables, foot-wear etc., to a Brahmin to be safely and surely passed over to the dead.

How are we to believe that a man has an iota of sense or rationalism in doing all these. Why should you give things only to Brahmins? Why should you fall at his feet? Why should you wash his feet and drink that water? If this is Hindu doctrine and philosophy, such a religion must go. Take the other rituals. Christening, house warming, marriage, puberty or anything, all are for Brahmin’s gain. Do people of other religions and countries behave like this? We do not respect our knowledge nor are we ashmed of our actions. Are we merely a mass of flesh and bones? Why should anybody get angry when I say all these to make you to think over. Who is responsible for our degradation? Is it religion or government?


In the scientifically advanced world, we are talking of gods and their great deeds. This is nothing but barbarous. Because our enemies find no reasonable charges against us, they are calling us atheists, with a bad motive and to create mischief.

So far as god is concerned we find the Christians and Muslims, somewhat reformed from the olden days of barbarians. They say that there can be only one god. They say that it is beyond human comprehension. They say that god does good to those who are good and punishes those who are bad. They say that god has no name or shape. They talk of good qualities. We need not worry about their god. Wise people accept their gods because they feel that their god would serve the purpose of creating a better society. What about Hindus and their thousands of gods created by Brahmins.? Why should Hindus worship so many gods? How did they come? See what are all made as gods! From cow, horse, bullock, monkey, bandicoot, stone, birds, metals, paper, all are deemed as gods. When I was in Kasi (Varanasi in North India - a holy town for Hindus), I saw two dogs being worshipped. Moreover gods have wives, concubines, and prostitutes. These gods are believed to eat, sleep and reproduce. They also have marriages and funerals.

Let them attribute anything to these gods. Kidnapping girls, gods enjoying with prostitutes are celebrated as festivals. Crores of rupees are wasted for these. The precious time of the people is wasted. Think over, whether all these are things to be done in the 20th Century.


Should we not feel ashamed of all these? Is it just or right to call us atheists? If there are gods, should they be like this? Will any intelligent man accept this? Does god require all these things we do, as pooja (prayer), offerings, marriages etc.,? Does any god approve all these? Seeing the gods as mere toys, we perform marriage thrice a year to them, why that? If gods really need wives, should we not find out what happened to the wives married last year? Were they divorced? Were they segregated? Have they deserted their husbands and ran away or have all died? Should we not think of all these? Why celebrate marriages every year for gods? Why Music, show, pomp and expenses? Do you know who eats the feast at marriages? How many festivals every year and at various places? What have we gained by all these? So far as our education is concerned 95% people are illiterate. In the world, our India is a very poor country. Should we not think why we should squander money in the name of god?

How many times do we perform poojas (prayers) and place offerings to god a day? How many measures of rice, dholl, and other articles are placed before god? People have no education, no work, no meal. Please consider how many crores of rupees are wasted year after year for celebrating Ekadashi, Arudra, Thai Poosam, Karthgai, and for visiting temples at Tirupathi, Thiruchendur and Rameswaram.

If we consider what pains are taken for these expenses, none could assert that gods have done good to our people in any manner. If the huge amount spent this way is diverted to other fields, we can run the government without taxes. If we create new industries and educational institutions we can solve the problems of illiteracy and unemployment. There will be no exploitation by foreign countries. Just to make a particular section of people (Brahmins) remain lazy and yet lead their lives well, why all others should bestow their hard earned money foolishly for all these?

How senselessly are we behaving in the name of god and devotion? How ugly do we seem when we carry the kavadi (a bent pole with metal vessels at both ends) on our shoulders! Wearing saffron colour cloth people roll in the streets! People shave their head, smear mud and ashes on the body! People prick themselves with small arrows into their tongue and other parts of body. People bathe in dirty water. All these in the name of god and devotion!

Moreover, milk, ghee, curd, honey, fruit, juices are being poured on the stone idols. They flow into gutters. All eatables are wasted. Are we to see this as mere fun? Do all these gods need gold jewels worth crores? Are costly silk garments needed? Why tall towers and big compound walls? Why gold and silver ‘Vimanas’ ? Are they not public property? Does religious duty mean that we should waste money on idols and thus help the lazy Brahmins to loot our money, enabling their people to become Indian Administrative Service (I.A.S) Officers, Judges, State Diwans etc.? If all these are for god’s blessings, should there be such gods? Think over.

Do the Muslims follow this sort of worship of god? Do the Christians do? Will the rationalist Indian accept all these?


When are we to get into the right path of devotion to god? When I ask this, the Brahmins dub us as atheists. Believing these Brahmins and their hirelings, the ignorant people raise the cry against us that god is in danger, religion is in danger! Is behaving in this barbarous way, theism or atheism? Whatever it be, we will not be cowed down by their hindering activities. Whatever we feel right, we will boldly say. We say Hindu religion and gods are dreadful diseases. Unless they are effaced out of existence our people cannot and country would not prosper. We say what we feel.

It is for you to think and act. We don’t compel you to believe what all we say as the Brahmins do. They say that if anyone believes god he will go to heaven. If anyone does not believe he will go to hell.

When I left the Congress party in 1925, I realized that our politics was under the monopoly of Brahmins. In the name of struggle for freedom of India it is the Brahmins who played the major role. Their struggle was not for establishing a good government for the people. There was no common cause behind the struggle. I was for crushing the Brahmin monopoly. I realized that god, religion and castes make them strong to exploit others and lead a happy life. I started the Self-Respect Movement myself and enlisted the cooperation of others. Congress pursued a policy of concentrating only on political reform. It neglected the social field. In the name of implementing a constructive programme, the Congress wanted to grab power and establish political domination. While my main aim was social reform and as I was doing my best to eradicate the evils in the name of god, religion, caste, dharma and sastras (Hindu Doctrines), I had to take steps to prevent Brahmin domination in politics.

My public life was multi-faced. My responsibilities increased. I had to swim against the current. My work was in fact a very tough one. If I counter the Brahmins politically, they made a march in the social field. If I countered them in the social field, they cleverly made a march in the political field. I had to arouse the feelings of the innocent Dravidian people in both the fields. I had to face a lot of difficulties in this task.

With all that, there was yet another trouble to me from my own men. Those who have become my followers attained maturity in many matters and gained publicity among the public. They became pawns in the hands of the enemies. Many actually opposed me and my work. I could only say that they did so as Prahaladan or Vibishanan did. After serving the public for 40 years I don’t find any other reason for their acts. It is for the wise people to assess the value of my service in the past 40 years.


We find Brahmin-Sudra differentiation in temples, shrines, schools, public roads, hotels, etc. Were the high and low discriminations, created by us or by Brahmins? If any one should think over all these, no one will dare to call us communalists.

The Brahmins do not for a moment realise that it is wrong to lower us to disgraceful state and at the same time raising themselves as the highest and respectable. What all we demand is equal status with self respect. But this is considered as a great sin or blunder.

They call it a godly movement or theist movement by safeguarding Aryan doctrines and Varnasharama Dharma (Colour based casteism code), at the same time making others as Sudras and Untouchables. But our Movement which stands for the destruction of Sudra name and untouchability is dubbed as atheists. They say that to talk with us (Dravidians), or to see us is sinful. But they say it is not sinful to fall at their feet. They say it is not sinful to call them ‘Samy’.

They say it is not sinful to see or touch the things to be offered to Brahmins. Nothing should be distributed to us first, they say. They insist that we should take them only after they have touched and tasted. They say we go to heaven by prostrating before them and drinking the water after washing their feet. They tuck the sacred thread they wear in the ear as they pass urine or motion. They say that they escape pollution by this. They will wear the thread only after a bath or when they deem they are pure and clean. Similarly they tuck the thread in the ear when they talk to the Sudras. Is it all non-communalism? We are asked to close our mouth with the hand or anything, when we talk to them. They object to the sound waves touching them.

We can cite thousands of such examples. Yet they, who stand in the way of our progressive life call us communalists and atheists. Many of us forfeit our human rights. Many are afraid of Brahmins. We should deem it a duty to make our people aware of their rights.

Look at what is happening in our politics. The Congress movement, started to get posts for them, was named as a national movement. They (Brahmins) are heaping evils on us as partners. They help the govt., and occupy high posts fetching 1000, 2000, 5000, 10,000 rupees as salary. They live, by supporting the government enjoying its favour, to grab high positions in the courts and educational institutions.

When we aspire for any of these, the Brahmins say that we are not fit. When we want to get ourselves made fit, they say we are unpatriotic and communalistic.

So it is absolutely desirable to have a separate Movement for us. Only then we will be able to solve our problems. We need a Movement to face our difficulties. We need a Movement to find a solution to our problems. We should gain freedom with self-respect. We should all come together and work hard in the Movement. Everyone should play his part in the Movement.

[Quelle: COLLECTED WORKS OF PERIYAR E.V.R. ( -- Fair use]

"The Self-Respect movement, however, directed its appeal primarily to the socially and economically backward non-Brahman communities which were low in the Tamil ritual status, including the scheduled castes, the Vanniyakula Kshatriyas, the Nadars, the Agamudaiyars and the Isai Vellalars, whose sordid social condition the Self-Respecters brought to the notice of the government in their speeches and writings. Likewise they espoused the cause of the niggardly paid agricultural labourers and unskilled workers, mainly drawn from scheduled castes in rural and urban areas respectively. Thus the Self-Respect movement publicized the social and economic discontent among the backward communities and at the same time enlisted their massive support. Consequently from its inception it assumed the character of a mass movement, though its leaders and its chief propagandists came largely from the Vellala and the Balija Naidu communities."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 88f. -- Online: -- Fair use]


M. S. Purnalingam Pillai (Tamil மு. சி. பூரணலிங்கம் பிள்ளை - Mu. Ci. Pūraṇaliṅkam Piḷḷai, 1866 - 1947) im Vorwort zu பழந்தமிழ் - Paḻantamiḻ von A. Sivaprakasar:

"As M.S. Purnalingam Pillai (1866-1947) observed in 1925, the failure to recognize Tamil’s primordiality, anteriority, and antiquity had allowed Sanskrit to rule the pedagogical and political roost as India’s most ancient and classical language.

“It is high time for the reformed Madras University to disabuse itself of this unfortunate prepossession [sic] and to recognize the ancientness of the Tamil language and literature in the light of what Strabo, Ptolemy and Pliny, and Periplus have said about the Lost Lemuria or Tamilakam [தமிழகம்] as the cradle of the human race.”

Here, once again, the Tamil placemaker ran up against the fact that whereas Sanskrit could offer empirical proof of its ancient works as testimony to its classicality, Tamil’s even more ancient and glorious wealth had been plundered by “the cruel sea,” and lost forever."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 118f. -- Fair use]


Kallidaikurichi (Tamil கல்லிடைக்குறிச்சி): Gurukula-Konflikt

"Still another affair in which Ramaswami Naicker became involved was the issue of separate dining which was enforced for Brahman and non-Brahman students at a traditional school or Gurukulam in the famous Brahman village of Kallidaikurchi in Tinnevelly district. As a center of Brahman culture and learning Kallidaikurchi had a tradition of conflict with the non-Brahmans of the area dating back at least to 1917, when the Justice Party took exception to Taluq Board funds being spent on the Sanskrit College at Kallidaikurchi. Only a few non-Brahmans were permitted to enter the school, and they were not allowed to study the Vedas. The Gurukulam, which was actually at Shermadevi, a little to the south of Kallidaikurchi, was established in December, 1922, by V. V. S. Aiyer, a former terrorist and editor (1920—1922) of the Tamil newspaper Desabhaktan. Most of its financial support came from private individuals such as the Nattukottai Chettis in India and Burma, and from a number of organizations. The Tamil Nad Congress Committee gave Rs. 5,000 to the Gurukulam at the time of its establishment.

In January, 1925, reports that non-Brahmans at the Gurukulam were forced to eat apart from the Brahmans came to the attention of Ramaswami Naicker and P. Varadarajulu Naidu (both Balija Naidus). A committee from the T.N.C.C. [Tamil Nadu Congress Committee] was thereupon appointed to look into the matter, and in April Varadarajulu Naidu began an all-out campaign not only against the Gurukulam but also against what he considered to be Brahman domination within the Congress. He told a public audience at Salem that before the Tamils sought equality with foreigners they should

“establish complete equality with the Brahmins in the matter of inter-dining and save the Non-Brahmins from the age-long social injustice that had been meted out to them by the Brahmins . . . V. V. S. Ayyar’s action in not allowing Non-Brahmin boys to eat with the Brahmins [was] a direct challenge to the Non-Brahmins, and . . . this was the time for the Tamilians to vindicate their honour.” 

Two weeks later Varadarajulu Naidu indirectly caused a minor riot when he spoke at a meeting in Mayavaram, in Tanjore district. While the meeting was in progress a rumor was circulated that a Brahman who had been heckling Varadarajulu Naidu during his speech had been forcibly ejected by some non-Brahmans. The ensuing melee was so wild that the meeting broke up in confusion. When the T.N.C.C. met at Trichinopoly Trichinopoly, Varadarajulu Naidu used his influence as president to limit the agenda almost exclusively to a discussion of the Brahman-non-Brahman question. In the event, a compromise resolution was agreed on by which the Committee recommended that all organizations partaking in the national movement should follow a principle shunning gradations of merit based on birth. Ramaswami Naicker agreed with the resolution, adding that if the country was not yet prepared to accept this state of things, it was the duty of the non-Brahmans to create public opinion which was receptive to their rights.

Almost simultaneously, as a direct result of non-Brahman pressure, V. V. S. Aiyer resigned as head of the Gurukulam. Even with this victory, Varadarajulu Naidu thought seriously of leaving Congress as a protest against Brahmans in the Tamil Nad organization. A non-Brahman lawyer more or less summed up the feeling when he wrote to the Hindu (Apr. 19,1925):

 “Mahatama Gandhi wanted this year to be a ‘spinning year,’ but Dr. Naidu is making it a ‘non-Brahman year.’ ”

[Quelle: Eugene F. Irschick: Politics and social conflict in South India : The non-Brahman Movement and Tamil Separatism, 1916-1929. -- Bombay : Oxford University Press,1969. -- S. 269ff. -- Online: Politics And Social Conflict In South India : Eugene F. Irschick : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint die Tamil Wochenzeitschrift

குடி அரசு - Kuṭi aracu  = Kudi-Arasu / hrsg. von Periyar_E._V._Ramasamy (Tamil ஈரோடு வெங்கடப்பா இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973)

Abb.: Titelblatt 1939-09-03
Schlagzeile: வீழ்க இந்தி! - Vīḻka inti! = Hindi, falle!
[Public domain]

"In November 1925, Periyar_E._V._Ramasamy walked out of the Tamilnadu Congress Provincial Conference at Kancheepuram, unable to see through his resolution on proportionate communal representation (caste-based reservations). This event is seen as the founding moment of the non-Brahmin movement in Tamilnadu. Following this, Periyar launched a strident and uninhibited campaign for social justice through communal representation, and a vehement attack on Brahminism, which stalled its attainment. Kudi Arasu, the weekly started by him some months before his walkout, was the primary vehicle of his ideas. By mid-1927 there was a gradual shift in the content of Periyar’s campaign, which was reflected in the pages of Kudi Arasu. The attack on Brahminism and the championing of reservations quickly grew into a radical critique of caste and religion. The itihasams and puranams were critiqued from a rationalist viewpoint and condemned as irrational and inimical to morals and social justice. The Ramayanam turned out to be one of the first targets of this campaign. E.M. Subramania Pillai, a Saivite scholar, writing under the pseudonym of Chandrasekara Pavalar, began a serial on the ‘obscenities of the Ramayanam’ in Kudi Arasu. Gradually, this attack on religion began encompassing Saivism also. Saivite texts like Periya Puranam and Thiruvilaiyadal Puranam, and Saivite saints like Thirugnanasambandar Thirugnanasambandar, were brought under rationalist scrutiny. In a series of essays on the venerated Periya Puranam published in Kudi Arasu, one Meikandar proclaimed,

‘Periya Puranam creates caste conflicts; Periya Puranam advocates caste differences; Periya Puranam portrays many acts inimical to one’s self-respect as devotion to God; Periya Puranam justifies murderous deeds as service to Saivism.’

The Saivites initially encountered this attack on Saivism and its apostles by the Self-respect Movement with shock, disbelief and dismay. This was because the Self-respect Movement was generally perceived by the Saivites, as a movement started

‘to counter the harm done by the Brahmins to the Tamil people’.

The Saivites had for long seen the non-brahmin movement as an organisation to champion their cause and protect their interests, if not actually launched and run by themselves. In the initial stages of the conflict, this was emphasised again and again, and a compromise was sought on this ground. As Ilavalaganar, a student of Maraimalai Adigal, wrote:

Saivism is not one iota different from the primary aim of the Self-Respect movement. The Self-Respect movement arose to dispel the illusion of Brahminism from the Tamil people and infuse self-respect into them. Saivism also does the same. The Self-Respect movement detests the Aryan Brahmins. Saivism too doesn’t like the Aryan Brahmins one bit. . . . The Self-Respect movement wishes to uplift the depressed classes. That is also the basic idea of Saivism....The Self-Respect movement is against caste differences among the Tamil people. Saivism too emphasises the same point... when there are so many commonalities, why should Saivism and Saivite apostles be deprecated and condemned?

It was also argued that the non-Brahmin movement drew much from the Saivite intellectuals. Maraimalai Adigal actually claimed that the Self-respect Movement came into being by adopting his views and principles. The editor of Siddhantam, M. Balasubramania Mudaliar, went one step further when he said,

‘The best parts of the Self-respect Movement are nothing but alms thrown by Maraimalai Adigal, the spiritual father’ and cursed them that, ‘If they who got these alms and campaigned based on it, are thankless to the spiritual father, all their efforts will go waste. . . '

The most strident anti-Self-Respect views were expressed in Sivanesan, a Saivite journal published from the Chettinadu region, which published a series of articles right from early 1928 condemning both the reforms and radical change expounded by the Self-respect Movement."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Agasthiyar Falls (Tamil அகத்தியர் அருவி): V. V. S. Aiyar (Tamil வ. வே. சுப்பிரமணிய ஐயர் - Va. Vē. Cuppiramaṇiya Aiyar, 1881 - 1925), Brahmane, ertrinkt beim Versuch , seine Tochter zu retten.

Abb.: V. V. S. Aiyar
[Public domain]

Varahaneri Venkatesa Subramaniam Aiyar
Born 2 April 1881

TrichinopolyMadras PresidencyIndia

Died 3 June 1925 (aged 44)

Papanasam Falls, Madras PresidencyIndia

Cause of death Drowned in Papanasam Falls under mysterious circumstances
Nationality Indian
Other names V. V. S. Aiyar
Education Lincoln's InnLondon
Known for Indian Independence MovementIndia Houseliterary works


"Another enthusiast whose devotion became suspect was V. V. Subramania Aiyar, editor briefly of the nationalist newspaper, the Tecapaktan [தேசபக்தன் - Patriot] (1920-21). In 1922, with the help of funds from the Congress and private patrons, Subramanian established a residential Tamil school (tamilk kurukulam [தமிழ் குருகுலம்]) first at Kallidaikurichi and then at Sheramadevi (in Tirunelveli) for the purpose of teaching students in Tamil, following the principles of the national education scheme. His intention, he explained in a 1924 editorial in the journal Pala Parati that he launched from the school, was

“to restore Tamil to its natural state of unrivalled preeminence.” 

He planned to do this by teaching students not only ancient arts and sciences but modern ones as well, and by imparting to them the spirit of social service. Subramanian himself resigned from the management of the school in 1925 after a scandal erupted when it was learned that Brahman students were fed separately. Soon after, he died in an accident while trying to save his young daughter from drowning (Visswanathan 1983: 45-55).

Subramanian did not start out as a Tamil devotee; on the contrary, he first made a name for himself as a nationalist who advocated violence as the principal means to secure freedom from colonial rule. Born in a small village near Tiruchirappalli in 1881, he went on to get a B.A. in history, economics, and Latin from Madras University. He worked for a few years as a lawyer in Tiruchirapalli and in Rangoon before going to London in 1907 to study for a law degree. There, he linked up with V. D. Savarkar and, over the next three years, got drawn into the circle of militant nationalists around him. On his return to India in 1910, he went to Pondicherry, where he met Subramania Bharati  and became part of the poet’s circle. Subramanian’s devotional activities included an English translation of the Tirukkural in 1915 and the establishment of a Tamil publishing house in 1916 (Mani 1993). In a number of essays on Tamil he published beginning in 1914, he took an Indianist stance on the language; in 1924, he even insisted (to the ire of many fellow devotees) that for its replenishment and modernization, Tamil should turn to Sanskrit, “the great treasure house.” He pointed out that hostility towards Sanskrit was misplaced when even the earliest works of Tamil literature had so many words of Sanskritic origin (Subramania Aiyar 1981; Mani 1993: 116). His own Tamil was highly Sanskritic, and drew criticism even from someone like Kalyanasundaram, a fellow Indianist. Another of its devotees sarcastically asked how Subramania Aiyar could claim to restore Tamil to its “natural state of unrivalled preeminence” if his own speech was so inflected with Sanskrit (Mani 1993: 187-88).

The 1925 scandal over the Sheramadevi Tamil school, which led to Subramania Aiyar’s earlier record as a “militant nationalist” being overshadowed by his putative Brahmanness, was soon followed by attacks on other Brahman adherents of Tamil. In 1926, Ramasami published an essay in his Kuti Aracu [குடி அரசு] in which he ridiculed his fellow “non-Brahmans” who had established the prestigious Madurai Tamil Sangam only to have that association hijacked by Brahmans and their Sanskritized Tamil (E. V. Ramasami 1985: 82-83)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 196f. -- Fair use]


Munnirpallam (tamil  முன்னீர்பள்ளம்) : Es erscheint:

M. S. Purnalingam Pillai (Tamil மு. சி. பூரணலிங்கம் பிள்ளை - Mu. Ci. Pūraṇaliṅkam Piḷḷai, 1866 - 1947): Tamil India. -- Munnirpallam, 1927. -- 200 S. -- Online: TAMIL INDIA : Purnalingam Pillai, M. S. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive


Western Scholars have evolved a theory which traces the origin of Indian civilisation and of the Aryan race to Central Asia. Everybody acquiesces in this theory, and therefore everybody believes it. Let us consider it a moment.

One would expect that when the history of a people was in question, the traditions and literature of that people would be the first sources of information on the subject sought. But though you have the oldest civilisation and literature in the world, and records which purport to recite your history for many hundreds of thousands of years, the orientalists do not pay you this compliment. Your books do not anywhere mention or suggest any other dwelling place for Indians than India. Their evidence is unanimously and distinctly to the contrary. For instance, Rama flourished in India and conquered Ceylon in Treta-yuga, not far from a million years ago. But the orientalists do not vouchsafe your books or your traditions the slightest consideration. They proceed to construct a theory of their own, which they introduce by remarks of this kind - I quote from one of their principal books, Muir’s Sanskrit Texts [Original Sanskrit texts on the origin and progress of the religion and institutions of India; collected, tr. into English, and illustrated by notes. Chiefly for the use of students and others in India].

“I must begin,” says this scholar, “within a candid admission that, so far as I know, none of the Sanskrit books, not even the most ancient, contains any distinct reference to the foreign origin of the Indians."

The theory is that the Aryans came to India from Central Asia. At first 1000 years or so B.C. was considered early enough for this migration. Now, I believe, they have gotten the date back 5000 or 6000 years earlier than that.

On what do they base this theory ? I will give you samples of their principal arguments, and beg you to note well their character.

They are many names in the Rig Veda, some of which are thought to denote Indian rivers. Now, they say, the Ganges is mentioned in the Rig Veda but once, and towards the end. But the Indus or Sindu, is mentioned early and often. This shows that your ancestors during most of the time of the composition of the Rig Veda hymns, were dwelling near the Indus, that is in the Punjab and Afghanistan, and did not reach the Ganges until the late rhymes were composed.

Very good, but when we look into the meaning of ‘Sindhu’, what do we find ? First, that it is a name of Chandra, the presiding devata of the moon. Second, that it is a name for the ocean. Third, that it is used to denote any great confluence of waters, and finally, (Sankaracharya in the Bashya-Hridaya) that it is another name for the Ganges itself. Having adopted the theory, the Orientalists proceed to build it up interpreting everything to support it. For instance, the Rig Veda mentions the ‘Sarayu’. There is a river of that name on Oudh, falling into the Ganges below Benares. This river is far too south to fit their theory. So they say  I quote one of their leading men, Lassen -

“Perhaps it is an affluent of the Sarasvati (a river of the Punjab); in any case, it is to be distinguished from the well-known affluent of the Ganges. ”

Then as to writing. Their theory required them to make you illiterate in ancient times, for otherwise how can the silence of your literature on this important subject be explained? Your books must be more recent than these events, if the theory is to stand.

“An illiterate people,” says A.W. Von Schlegal [August Wilhelm Schlegel], “ignorant of writing, which has adopted a stationary home after long and arduous migration, might, after a few centuries, easily lose all recollection of its change of habitation.”

So they say that, in as much as they can find no proof to the contrary, your ancestors could not write more than 2300 or 2400 years ago. But they cannot deny that you were a great people, with abundant commerce. Megasthenes shows that even Solomon got merchandise from India. How was your business conducted without writing ? Because no records are found, is a very slender basis on which to deny the knowledge of writing to a great, civilised and commercial people.

The examples I have given are sufficient to illustrate the flimsiness of the arguments of the Orientalists. These theories are the merest and most random speculations, and impudent speculations at that. (From a lecture delivered by Mr. Myron H. Phelps, B.A., LL.B. of New York, at the Hindu College, Jaffna, on Feb. 28, 1910)."

[a.a.O., S. 129ff]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Madras Mail zu Thani Tamil Iyakkam (Tamil தனித் தமிழ் இயக்கம்) (Pure or Independent Tamil Movement)

"A shortsighted nationalism compels such folk to strive to keep all immigrant words out. . .. Fortunately such purists do not control the growth of a language. That is the work of the common people. The purists may frown at slang, they may grumble that the language is being debased by slipshod and lazy talkers and writers, but fifty per cent of what they condemn eventually finds its way into the language, to be defended by a later generation of purists as violently as the earlier fought for its exclusion. Language cannot be successfully cribbed, cabined and confined."
(quoted in Nambi Arooran 1976: 341-42.)

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 147. -- Fair use]

1928-07-22 ff.

Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Kontroverse von  Maraimalai_Adigal  (1876 - 1950) und Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973)

"Maraimalai Adigal and the Self-Respect Movement

That Maraimalai Adigal was the first to respond to the challenge posed by the Self-respect Movement is hardly surprising. Born as R.S. Vedachalam in Nagapattinam, he had his early education in Tamil and Saiva Siddhantam, and was known for his erudition. Somasundara Nayagar, well-known for his tirades against Vaishnavism and Vedantam, further educated him in Saiva Siddhantam. Adigal launched the Annual Saiva Siddhanta Conferences in 1906 and occupied an eminent place in the Saivite intellectual world. Well-known for his Pure Tamil Movement and his literary and philosophical treatises, he was a highly rated and widely respected scholar.

From Adigal’s diaries of this period, it is clear that the Self-Respect Movement occupied his mind. He seems to have discussed the criticism launched against Saivism with anybody who visited him in his house at Pallavaram, then a little village outside Madras. He thought of ways and means to counter the ‘destructive movement’ and the ‘atheistic vomittings’ of Periyar. He asked Ulaganatha Mudaliar, the brother of Thiru. V. Kalyanasundara Mudaliar, another eminent Saivite scholar, to arrange for a presidency-wide lecture tour to counter the propaganda of the Self-respect Movement. Here it is interesting to note why, in Adigal’s view, the Self-respect Movement singled out Saivism for attack. He considered the movement to be the

‘mischief of Vaishnavites’!

The leader of the Self-Respect movement is a Vaishnavite; his brother too, we come to understand, is a Vaishnavite who has converted many gullible Saivites to Vaishnavism. Their accomplices too are Vaishnavites. Some of the Justice party leaders too are Vaishnavites. Moreover, not only are they Vaishnavites, they are also Telugu-speakers.’

Thus, Maraimalai Adigal could not, at least initially, comprehend the far-reaching objectives and the significance of the Self-respect Movement, and was only able to come to terms with it from a very sectarian perspective. But not all Saivites were like him. Probably, this was why Thiru. Vi. Ka. [Thiru._V._Kalyanasundaram] refused to publish Adigal’s essay ‘Saivamum Suyamariyathai Iyakkamum’ [சைவமும் சுயமரியாதை இயக்கமும்] (Saivism and the Selfrespect Movement), which articulated these views, in his Navasakti [நவசக்தி]. Adigal had to resort to the orthodox Sivanesan [சிவநேசன்] to get through his views.

Matters came to a head on 22 July 1928. Maraimalai Adigal presided over the annual celebrations of the Sri Balasubramania Baktha Janasabhai at Royapettai, Madras, a leading Saivite association that boasted of Thiru. Vi. Ka., his brother and M. Balasubramania Mudaliar, the editor of Siddhantam [சித்தாந்தம்] as active members among others. In this meeting, Adigal

 ‘condemned vehemently the atheistic doctrines of Mr. Ramasamy Naicker [Periyar] and the mischief of his Suyamariyathai [Self-respect] Movement’. 

During the course of his lecture, N. Dandapani Pillai, a Self-Respect activist and J.S. Kannappar, incidentally a Dalit student of Maraimalai Adigal and a member of the editorial board of Dravidan [திராவிடன்] (the official Tamil daily of the Justice party), raised questions about the persecution of Jains by the seventh-century Saivite saint Thirugnanasambandar. Consequently, pandemonium broke out, and the meeting ended in confusion.

There were conflicting reports on what actually transpired in the meeting-hall. Maraimalai Adigal wrote in his diary that he

'answered [Dandapani Pillai’s] questions tellingly and showed that there was no[t] a particle of evidence to prove the Jains were persecuted by St. Gnanasambanda. My answers satisfied Dandapani Pillai and the audience and Mr. Pillai, at the end of the speech, thanked me heartily and left the place.’ 

This version was reiterated in the pamphlet issued by his supporters and disciples, ‘Dravidanin Poimai Nandantha Vannam Uraithal’ ட்ராவிடனின் பொய்மை நண்டாந்த வண்ணம் உரைத்தல்] (A true account of Dravidan's falsehood). But the Self-respect papers gave an entirely different version of the events. Kudi Arasu [குடி அரசு] alleged that Maraimalai Adigal instigated the audience to murder Periyar and that, when Dandapani Pillai and Kannappar raised questions, Adigal broke into tears, unable to refute them.

A virtual print-war broke out between the two sides and serious charges were traded. The Balasubramania Baktha Janasabhai issued a series of pamphlets in defence of Adigal and refuted

‘the calumnies heaped by the Self-respecters on the Saivite religion and its apostles.’

In the Kudi Arasu too, there were editorials and articles attacking Maraimalai Adigal. Kaivalya Swamiyar, wrote a particularly hard-hitting piece, insinuating that Adigal, while propagating Saivism, actually ate meat on the sly. He further added,

‘Swami Vedachalam [Maraimalai Adigal] is no apostle born to establish religion. Nor is he a prophet. He is but a tutor who teaches for a mere >24 wage.'

Maraimalai Adigal was so infuriated that he met K. Subramania Pillai, a very eminent Saivite scholar and active in the Justice Party, at his home in Egmore in Madras, and

‘warned him of the Justice Party; told him plainly that he must not put faith in the support of that and asked him to practise as a vakil...’. 

He was so incensed about

‘the brute followers of Suyamariyathai Movement [who] continuously criticise me with rancour and indiscrimination’,

that he even contemplated sending a letter to the police authorities about their mischief.

Finally, in order to defuse the situation, Thiru. Vi. Ka., and K. A. P. Viswanatham, a Saivite and an active member of the Justice Party, met Maraimalai Adigal at Pallavaram and attempted a reconciliation. They requested him to write ‘a letter in a friendly tone’, to which Adigal readily complied.

Dear Sir,—I am fine. Let me know of your well being. I understand from [K.A.P] Viswanatha Pillai of Tiruchi that there is a note about me in Kudi Arasu. I am given to understand that it was written based on the reports of Dravidan and Tamilnadu on the annual celebrations at Chennai Guhananda Nilayam. I’ve neither wished nor uttered a word that either you or the friends of your movement may come to harm. Don’t mistake me and bear any grudge. However, I am not in agreement with your views regarding God and the apostles. Please do not get offended by some of the reports in the press. May your attempts for the upliftment of the Tamil people succeed!—S. Vedachalam, 24-8-1928.

But the matter did not end there. As the letter was ‘wrongly distributed’ by K.A.P. Viswanatham, the Dravidan published it as an apology rendered by Maraimalai Adigal to Periyar. Following this, Periyar wrote a long editorial in his Kudi Arasu. The editorial is of interest, not only for the magnanimity of Periyar, but also for the light it throws on the basis of the reconciliation. Periyar, in his writeup, emphasised that he had demanded an apology only for putting an end to the whole controversy. He not only accepted full responsibility for Dravidan's unwarranted disclosure of the letter but also offered an unconditional apology to Adigal. Only then did he publish Adigal’s letter. However, he stood steadfast in his principles and said,

‘But regarding the difference of opinion, how much ever [Maraimalai Adigal] is willing to compromise, we will not budge an inch from our views and principles, either for the sake of his or anybody else’s friendship.’

Why then did Periyar accept the reconciliation?

‘Right from the time we came to know of [Maraimalai Adigal], a sort of inexplicable attachment grew. Whenever we discussed about him with our friends, it emerged that he was a close confidante and a source of strength to all our aspirations and principles.’

Thus, it was only on a broad non-Brahmin platform that reconciliation was struck. Nothing else was yielded, as both stuck to their guns. As a sign of the reconciliation, Maraimalai Adigal began a serial on the Ramayanam in the Self-respect English weekly, the Revolt."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint die englisschprachige Zeitschrift des Self-Respect Movement:

Revolt / hrsg. von  S. Ramanathan (Tamil எஸ். இராமநாதன் - Es. Irāmanātaṉ,, 1895 - 1970) und E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973)

"Through this English paper, Ramanathan tried to enlarge the scope and activities of the Self-Respect movement in the presidency. But he was unsuccessful because the number of readers was small and the few sympathetic ones were frightened off by the tone and content. Gurusami’s [Kuthoosi Gurusamy - குத்தூசி குருசாமி, 1906 - 1965] articles on the epics, most of them on the Ramayana, were characteristic examples to judge the paper. His aim in writing those articles was to draw aside the veil of sanctity attached to the epics which gave them a mystic influence over men’s minds and to show the epic characters’ sexual perversities and despicable qualities which were detestable to the moral standards of the Tamils. When the first article was published the readers were shocked by its interpretation of the story of the Ramayana because it questioned the infallible qualities of the epic characters. Readers wrote several letters to the editors, protesting against the ignoble treatment of the theme and questioning the motive of the paper in drawing attention to the ugly features of the epic. Some readers argued that the Ramayana should be read only as a form of literature and a work of art portraying human virtues and weaknesses and that to take it as literal history would be twisting the aim of the author, Valmiki. Gurusami replied in an article of 5 December 1928:

Our object in publishing the series of articles... on the Ithihasas, is to encourage a study of the ancient literature of our country with a critical mind ... our contention is that the Ramayana is valuable only as reflecting the mentality of the people who wrote those stories. The Ithihasas are not to be relied on as accurate chronicles of events nor should they be taken as portraying human virtues that hold good for all time. The Ramayana is neither a history of ancient times nor a book of morals applicable to our times.

Articles of a controversial nature continued to be published, ignoring the protests and the feelings of the reading public. So the paper lost support.

As a result its circulation was limited to a few thousand and its influence was mainly upon the radical section of the student population."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 91ff. -- Online: -- Fair use]

1929 - 1932

E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) und S. Ramanatha Pillai (Tamil எஸ். ராமநாத பிள்ளை, 1895 - 1968) besuchen


Tinnevelly (Tamil திருநெல்வேலி): Saivapperiyar Thanikkotam (The Special Conference of Saivite Scholars)

"The continued attack on Saivism by the Self-respecters impelled the Saivites to adopt fire-fighting tactics. In an ‘Appeal to the Saivite People, Saivite Mutts and Saivite Associations’, dated 25 September 1928, the Then India Saiva Siddhanta Sangam of Tirunelveli (run by V. Thiruvarangam Pillai and his brother V. Subbiah Pillai, the founders of the Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society) called for urgent action. It called for extended lecture tours of Saivite propagandists, the publication of pamphlets, the establishment of Saivite schools and more importantly the organising of a Saivite Conference. Out of this was born the ‘Saivapperiyar Thanikkootam’ (The Special Conference of Saivite Scholars) which played a crucial role in the struggle between the Saivites and the Self-respect Movement.

S. Sachidanandam Pillai, a respected Saivite scholar, was the first to respond to this appeal. In a lengthy personal communication to V. Thiruvarangam Pillai, he discussed matters at length. He conceded that

‘Kudi Arasu [குடி அரசு] and Dravidan [திராவிடன்] were first launched with the lofty ideal of improving the lot of the Tamil people in the political, public and social life. With the confused idea of freeing the Tamils from the conspiracy of Brahmins as their objective’,

they had now rejected religion as a whole. Blaming the Self-respect leaders of ignorance in religious matters, he also added that in the present state of affairs, there was indeed some decadence in the state of religion. He wrote:

In this context, it is my view that before condemning the unwarranted trespasses of Kudi Arasu and Dravidan, we must call a meeting of scholars of Saivite and Vaishnavite Tamil people, who are well-versed in the arts, religious texts, worldly matters, and ancient religion and culture. The meeting should not be a big conference which falls into the vile net of the press, but held, separately. The resolutions alone may be made public. Only then should we consider condemning the above journals. I am of the view that we should guide them along the right path and not try to finish them off. It is expedient to invite the editor of Kudi Arasu to the meeting and arrange for a dialogue.

Sachidanandam Pillai’s views were the result of much serious thought and contemplation. Resolutions were passed in the Balasubramania Baktha Janasabhai in December 1928 and Then India Saiva Siddhanta Sangam in January 1929 calling for the Special Conference of Saivite Scholars. The moderation and sobriety of Sachidanandam Pillai were evident in the planning of the Conference. But the Self-Respect Conference held on 17-18 February 1929 at Kancheepuram, came as the last straw, and any hopes of dialogue or compromise were dashed. In this historic conference, many radical speeches and resolutions were made. Two of the resolutions that evoked hysterical reactions among the Saivites were the ones regarding the dropping of caste surnames, and the condemnation of sporting religious marks on the forehead.

These resolutions gave a sense of urgency to the Saivites and the arrangements for the Special Conference were hastened. Sachidanandam Pillai set the tone of the conference with a questionnaire titled

'Saivapperiyar Thanikkoottathin Avasiyamum Velaiyum’ (The Need for and the Functions of the Special Conference of Saivite Scholars).

This was carried in all the important Saivite journals, with an appeal for the considered response of all concerned Saivites.

The statement began with the preamble:

Confusion now looms large in the society and religious life of Tamilnadu. As the social formation and religion appear to be inextricably tied to one another, social reformers argue that religion is the cause of all social hardships, and are going about condemning religion and working hard against it.

Then it proceeded to ask the following questions:

  1. Is religion essential for culture and morality?

  2. If yes, what is the nature of religious life?

  3. What sort of religion is required in this century?

  4. Can Saivism be that religion?

  5. What are the cardinal principles and practices of Saivism?

The list extended to about twentyfive questions. Clearly, the Self-respect challenge had rattled the Saivites: they were now being forced to introspect and raise very basic questions. The Self-respecters responded to this with counter-questions, reiterating their position.

Consequently, the Special Conference evoked great interest and the outcome was eagerly awaited. It also brought to the fore the various strands within the Saivites and much debate went on about them. Three predominant divisions could be discerned among the Saivites.

  • The first was the orthodox group, consisting of scholars such as P. Muthaiah Pillai and Swaminatha Pandithar, who were for fundamentals, and opposed all change. Sivanesan  [சிவநேசன்] was their mouthpiece.

  • The dominant strand was that of the moderates which included Maraimalai Adigal, Thiru. Vi. Ka. [Thiru._V._Kalyanasundaram], Sachidanandam Pillai, M. Balasubramania Mudaliar and others. Their aim was to accept some amount of reforms and overhaul Saivism according to the needs of changing times, and silence criticism from without, especially the Self-respect Movement. They wielded considerable influence over the Saivite fold and ran major journals like Navasakti, Sentamil Selvi and Siddhantam.

  • Last came the reformists, a motley crowd consisting of S. Murugappa, V. O. Chidambaram Pillai, P. Chidambaram Pillai, P. Thirukoodasundaram Pillai, K. M. Balasubramaniam and others.

The Special Conference was held between 29 and 31 March 1929 at Tirunelveli. Over ninety scholars representing over thirty-five Saivite organisations were present. The Conference was bogged down in controversy right from the beginning. There was widespread accusation that the organisers had sent invitations and entry forms only to their trusted men. In fact, P. Thirukoodasundaram Pillai was at first even denied entry into the Conference hall. He further complained that the Conference resolutions were all passed only in the Subjects Committee and not debated in the general meeting.

The strength of the moderates was only too evident as all the resolutions reflected their preponderance. The Conference resolved that religion was indispensable for morality and righteous living, and that Saivism was a rational religion suited to all times and all social formations. But it cannot be denied that the propaganda of the Self-respecters too had its impact. Some forward-looking resolutions like the abolition of dedication of devadasis to Saivite temples, the elimination of obscene images from temples, and the nominal equality of all devotees within the precincts of the temple were carried out.

The other sections of the Saivite fold could not push forward their views. The orthodox Saivites were totally sidelined, and as the Self-respecters themselves admitted, the Conference

 ‘was tactful enough to steer clear of the shoals and shallows of orthodox Saivism’. 

P. Muthaiah Pillai opposed the resolutions regarding the equality of all inside the temple. He argued that ‘the base classes’ who indulge in drink and such other vices had no business inside the temples. He further elaborated his views in a particularly obscurantist article titled ‘Poruthamatra Theermanangal’ (Irrelevant Resolutions).

On the other hand, the reformists fared even worse, and as the Revolt observed, a three months’ fuss had ended only in a lot of smoke. Scholars like K. M. Balasubramaniam, S. Murugappa and P. Chidambaram Pillai, for whatever reason, did not even turn up at the Conference. The reformists put up a weak presence in the form of V. O. Chidambaram Pillai and P. Thirukoodasundaram Pillai, and it is not even clear what they actually did. Kumaran [குமரன்] reported,

‘V.O. Chidambaram Pillai elaborated on some of the ways to reform Saivism. As most of the delegates did not agree to his views, Mr. Pillai walked out of the Subjects Committee.’ 

Kudi Arasu [குடி அரசு], probably exaggerating, wrote,

‘It appears that V.O. Chidambaram Pillai and P. Thirukoodasundaram Pillai were not permitted to attend the Special Committee. Then V.O. Chidambaram Pillai walked out saying that, ‘instead of even outsiders getting drawn towards Saivism, the outcome of the Conference was that some actually left the fold of Saivism’.

Though the Saivite journals maintained silence over this affair in the beginning, later they came out with their version. M. Balasubramania

Mudaliar said that V.O. Chidambaram Pillai was present during the entire course of the Subjects Committee and that he signed the minutes and posed for the photograph in the end; further he had even argued that sporting sacred ash was not an indispensable Saivite practice. In keeping with his view, the Subjects Committee had defined the practice (anuttanam [அனுஷ்டானம்]) as a ‘general practice’.

Of Thirukoodasundaram Pillai, we have mentioned earlier. In the beginning he was not permitted into the Conference Hall. He also criticised the formal passing of resolutions at the general meeting without any debate. A Gandhian nationalist, he had no connection with the Self-respect Movement as such. But, as he had a zeal for reform, he participated in the Conference. As the Self-respect journals wrote of his activities with approval, he was put in a delicate situation and was forced to explain his stance vis-à-vis the Self-respect Movement through a public statement. He explained that he favoured the reforms proposed by the Self-respect movement but not at the expense of the freedom of the nation.

On the whole, the Tirunelveli Special Conference ended with the moderates asserting themselves. Both the conservatives and the reformists were sidelined in the battle at Tirunelveli. But the war was not yet over."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Thirupathiripuliyur (Tamil திருப்பாதிரிப்புலியூர்): Saivite Conference

"The Thiruppathirippuliyur Conference was held as scheduled, and conducted for six days from 16 May 1929. The Conference was held with much fanfare in the Gnaniyar Mutt with Maraimalai Adigal in the chair. In this Conference, orthodoxy raised its head once again and attempted a comeback. Sivanesan [சிவநேசன்] expressed its apprehension that Maraimalai Adigal, instead of Gnaniyar Adigal being the chairman as contemplated earlier, would give way for concession to further reforms. It called for resolutions that would reflect, in its view, the true aspirations of the entire Saivite community.

One Rm. S. Chokkalinga Ayya of Chidambaram argued against the equality of all in the precincts of the temple. P. Muthaiah Pillai further continued his conservative attack by criticizsing at length the presidential address of Maraimalai Adigal.

The Conference finally concluded that religious reforms should be effected without prejudice to ‘indispensable ancient principles’, and granted quite a few concessions to the orthodox. The sporting of sacred ash, which was changed to ‘general practice' from 'indispensable practice' in the Tirunelveli Conference, was again reversed. Moreover the clause that only those who agreed to the resolutions would get franchise was incorporated into the constitution of the Saiva Siddhanta Mahasamajam [சைவ சித்தாந்த மஹாசமாஜம்], the apex body of all Saivite associations.

Thus did the Saivites meet the challenge posed by the Self-respect Movement. The moderates more or less asserted themselves by granting token concessions to the conservatives and fully warded off the reformist challenge."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]

1929-06-29 - 1929-09-22

Artikel in der Self-Respect Zeitschrift Revolt zur Allianz zwischen Vellala (Tamil வேளாளர் - Vēḷāḷar) und Brahmanen gegen das Self-Respect Movement:

"K. M. Balasubramaniam, himself a Vellala, was the first to give currency to the idea that the orthodox Brahmans were behind the Vellalas in their attack on the Self-Respect movement. In his article entitled, 'Temple Entry in the Tamil Country’, he said:

I must confess to a feeling of unmixed horror and indignation at the fact that it is the non-Brahmans (Vellalas) that prove to be the most inveterate and unbending opponents to this enlightened movement .... I can quite understand if monopolists (Brahmans) were to oppose it. But I am simply scandalized to see opposition emanate from a non-Brahman. Verily the slave mentality has become too much deep rooted in our breasts, and nothing can be a better tribute to the machination and ingenuity of the priestly class than that they are able to remain at the background and ignite the sparks of opposition in the non-Brahmans themselves. It is to this incurable disease of self extinction that the efficacious panacea of Self-Respect ought to be administered.

This view seems to have been very popular among the Self-Respecters because P. Chidambaram Pillai in his serial articles in the Revolt entitled, ’Saivism: An Exposure’ and ’Saivite Mentality and Self-Respect’, suggested to the Brahmans and the Vellalas that they should pool their resources to fight the movement instead of working together clandestinely. He reminded them of the Smarta-Saivite alliance under the aegis of Saint Tirunavukkarasar and Gnanasambandar which contributed to the extinction of Jainism and Buddhism and the emergence of the ’neo-Saivism, violent political Brahmino Saivism’ in South India. He also maintained that the establishment of Saivism had been possible only with the aid of the gibbet and by persecuting the Jains mercilessly. Pillai warned that if the treachery of a Vellala Tirunavukkarasar contributed to the downfall of Jainism, the same Vellala community should not shoulder the blame for the eclipse of the Self-Respect movement by working in collusion with Brahmans. Instead he wanted the Vellalas, chiefly the educated youths, to join the ranks of the movement in order to remove the barriers of caste, religion and sex - the three great barriers to non—Brahman’s progress."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 115f. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Tinnevely (Tamil திருநெல்வேலி): True Saivites Conference

"But another ‘True Saivites’ Conference’ was held on 21 July 1929 at Tirunelveli, where P. Chidambaram Pillai of Nagercoil delivered a lecture on ‘Self-respect and Saivism’, wherein he attacked the degeneration that had set into Saivism due to the corrupting influence of Smartha Brahminism. In a desperate bid to win over the Saivites, he spoke of the Saiva Vellalar origins of the Self-respect Movement. He also tried to rally sober scholars like Sachidanandam Pillai by attempting to make common cause. But his strong condemnation of caste superiority and the Aryan element in Saivism, along with the advocacy of liberty, equality and fraternity were only bound to further alienate the Saivites.

K. M. Balasubramaniam wrote on more or less similar lines, presenting the Self-respect Saivite view in his articles in the Revolt."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Kumbakonam (Tamil கும்பகோணம்): Varnashrama Sangam (Tamil வர்ணாஸ்ரம சங்கம்)

"At a Varnashrama Sangam conference held at Kumbakonam on 31 May 1930 Brahman leaders instead of condemning the Self-Respecters out-right appealed to their community members to probe into the causes of the spread of atheism and hatred of Brahmanism in the country, instead of denouncing those who had been propagating them. They reasoned that when the Brahmans abandoned their noble ideals of plain living and high thinking, of service and sacrifice, in favour of competing with other communities for material benefits and prestige of office it resulted in the emergence of anti-Brahman and anti-religious movements. To forestall the spread of atheism and anti-Brahmanism as a cult in the South, Brahmans should return to the actual living of the doctrines of Vedantic philosophy, according to which they should scrupulously lead an austere and religious life. This bold evaluation of the situation can be seen from the presidential address delivered by V. V.Srinivasa Iyengar at the conference.

it seems to me that it is in the manner and measure in which he (Brahman) has, abandoning his own ideals, sought to compete with the other castes and communities not only for means of subsistence, but for the loaves and fishes of office and the offices of power that he has naturally caused in those other castes and communities great irritation, the logical and historical manifestation of which has been the non-Brahman movement in South India.... I feel strongly that if the Brahman should again succeed in regaining in any degree his lost position as a teacher and a leader, he should again set himself to reduce to actual practice his doctrines of Vedantic philosophy’.

In spite of this reasoning and evaluation by progressive Brahmans, the organizers of these conferences succeeded in passing resolutions to the contrary, reaffirming their faith in the validity of varnashrama dharma and in the sanctions against the scheduled castes."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 113f. -- Online: -- Fair use]

1933 - 1939

Es erscheint die Tamil Literaturzeitschrift

மணிக்கொடி = Manikkodi - the premier nationalist Tamil weekly / gegründet von Stalin_Srinivasan (1899 - 1975)

Abb.: Titelblatt 1934-12-03
[Public domain]


J. A. Yates zum Telugu-Unterricht:

"J. A. Yates, an Englishman, who was posted in 1906 as Inspector of Schools for the three Circar Districts of Godavari, Visakhapatnam and Ganjam, was puzzled by the Telugu language taught in schools which was so very different from any variety of the spoken, language, educated or uneducated. He noticed a similar situation in the Tamil area where be had worked earlier. He recalls his impressions as follows (1933: 24):

One may perhaps laugh in later days at one’s youthful enthusiasms, yet I have never condemned myself for the anger that flared up in me when I entered the miserable hovels, as they often were, in which the children of the out-castes were permitted to take their first steps to learning, and observed the pitiable waste of time taken to teach them literary forms of words even for such simple processes as counting annas that they did not possess. I could see no reason for teaching them a language they would never hear from men of the higher castes, literate or illiterate. Was it not possible, I asked, to find a cultivated current Telugu, for their instruction? A parallel might be found in England if the children of the slums were taught Elizabethan English or Chaucerians’ English or Older West Saxon, or, to make the parallel more exact, a hotch-potch of all these ; but of course no parallel of the sort could be found for no one in England had thought of inventing such a conglomeration of archaisms as a means of modern instruction.

P. T. Sreenivasa Iyengar, then Principal of the Mrs. A. V. N. College, Visakhapatnam, who himself had enlightened views on the language issue in schools advised Mr. Yates to discuss the question with G. V. Apparow (Epigraphist to H. H. the Maharaja of Vizianagaram) and G. V. Ramamurti (History Professor in the Raja’s College, Paralakimidi). It was the enlightened discussions among these four scholars—two non-Telugus and two Telugus, Yates, Srinivasa Iyengar, Apparow and Ramamurti -- and the organized efforts that followed their coming together that started the real confrontation and controversy between the Classicists, on the one hand, and the Modernists, on the other."

[Quelle: Bh. Krishnamurti: Classical or modern : a controversy of styles in education in Telugu. -- In:  Language Movements in India : E Annamalai : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive, 1979. -- S, 7f. -- Fair use]


In der Tamil Zeitung குடி அரசு (Kudi Arasu) erscheint ein Editorial von E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) über "why today's Government should be overthrown". Deswegen wird er 1933-12-30 inhaftiert und zu 9 Monaten Haft sowie 300 Rs Strafe verurteilt.


E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) in der Tamil  Wochenzeitschrift குடி அரசு (Kudi Arasu)

"Job Hunters

There are others who go to the extent of condemning us as job hunters. I don’t deny it. I am not ashamed of seeking jobs. What is there shameful in seeking jobs? What do the Brahmins of Aryan Race do? Are they not seeking jobs? Are they not job hunters? Who are they? If they have the right to claim for jobs, how ironical it is to call us as job hunters? Please think over. Who really has the legitimate right to seek jobs. I would say that our people alone have the right to hunt for jobs.

If any Dravidian community neglects to seek jobs I would say that the community is an irresponsible community. I would condemn them as unpatriotic and anti social. They are traitors to the country.

Not only that. If any particular community is differentiated or ignored it will be disastrous to the society. If it is objected that jobs should not be given to a particular community based on its proportion to the total population that would amount to putting that community to disgrace and injustice. No community would be willing to continue as cowards devoid of self-respect forever. Any community that fails to assert for its legitimate share in the field of employment will be considered as degraded and shameless community."

[Quelle: COLLECTED WORKS OF PERIYAR E.V.R. ( -- Fair use]


E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) in der Tamil  Wochenzeitschrift குடி அரசு (Kudi Arasu):

"The government, which proclaims to root out communalism should have made the practice of putting caste marks as Namam on the foreheads as an offence and imprisoned the offender for one year. Similarly a law should have been passed to imprison for two years those, who wear the thread (Poonul). Are not these symbols indicative of the distinct communities? A government determined to eradicate castes ought to have given scissors to the policemen to cut away the tufts and Poonul. Simply saying that the government is not communal and yet permit the wearing of poonul, keeping tufts, chanting mantras (hymns), declare holidays for the birthdays of gods is condemnable. Under these circumstances, one cannot but condemn the government for upholding the communalism of Brahmins."

[Quelle: COLLECTED WORKS OF PERIYAR E.V.R. ( -- Fair use]

1937 - 1940

Madras Presidency: Anti-Hindi imposition agitation (Tamil இந்தித் திணிப்பு எதிர்ப்புப் போராட்டம் - Intit tiṇippu etirppup pōrāṭṭam)

"This controversy was followed by a broader alliance between the Self-respect Movement and the Saivites during the anti-Hindi agitation, 1937-39. In 1937, shortly after accepting office under the Government of India Act of 1935, C. Rajagopalachari introduced compulsory Hindi in schools. This was seen as a brazen act of imposition of a foreign language, to the detriment of Tamil language and culture. The Self-respect Movement launched an agitation calling for the repeal of Hindi. The Saivite elite too, who for long had championed the Tamil cause and even proclaimed themselves as the guardians of Tamil, jumped into the fray. Both sides opposed Hindi and saw its imposition as part of a larger Brahmin conspiracy.

The Saivites conducted a number of meetings and processions to condemn Rajaji’s [C. Rajagopalachari] move. Inaugurating the TiruchiTamil Conference, K. Subramania Pillai emphasised that the entry of Hindi would spell doom to Tamil and even called for the creation of a separate Tamil province. In the Annual Saiva Siddhanta Mahasamajam Conference at Vellore, held in December 1937, similar views were expressed and resolutions passed. One resolution condemned the imposition of Hindi, which, it was pointed out, was not even part of the Congress manifesto.

T.V. Umamaheswaran Pillai organised condemnatory meetings under the aegis of the Karanthai Tamil Sangam in Thanjavur. The Tillai Tamil Sangam at Chidambaram, in its first anniversary meeting condemned compulsory Hindi. Prominent Saivite Tamil scholars like N. Kandaswamy Pillai, Pandithamani Kathiresan Chettiar and S. Somasundara Bharathi participated in this conference. At Thiruvaiyaru, R. Venkatachalam Pillai led a rally of students of the Sentamil College on 31 August 1937. He also organised a meeting in November 1937, in which S. S. Bharati, T.V. Umamaheswaran Pillai and K. A. P. Viswanatham spoke.

The Saivite elite in their traditional stronghold of Tirunelveli organised an association called Tamil Pathukappu Kazhagam [தமிழ் பாதுகாப்பு கழகம்] (Tamil Protection Association) for fighting Hindi. Doyens of the Saivite world M.V. Nellaiyappa Pillai, M.S. Purnlingam Pillai, Punnaivananatha Mudaliar, K. Appadurai and V. Thiruvarangam Pillai were active in this association. The association also published a number of pamphlets. V. Thiruvarangam Pillai, who was the moving spirit behind it, also published a number of anti-Hindi writings in Sentamil Selvi, the Tamil research journal run by him. Scholars like Maraimalai Adigal, Sivananda Adigal, M.V. Nellaiyappa Pillai, Arul Thangayya, Devaneya Pavanar and Ilavalaganar contributed to the above journal. Such instances of Saivite opposition to Hindi are only a sample. Saivites played a major role in the agitation against Hindi, which needs to be explored in greater detail.

It was in this context that the Self-respect Movement sought to forge an open alliance with the Saivites. Its call to the Saivite world were marked by statements meant to provoke them into an active alliance, which also shed light on the actual nature of relationship then existing between the two. Kudi Arasu [குடி அரசு], exhorted the heads of the powerful Saivite mutts,

‘We will forget all that you have done earlier. Bravely come forward now; apart from providing pecuniary help, you should also send your devotees to our side...'

Again, in another editorial, Kudi Arasu, calling for the unity of all Tamils, dubbed the imposition of Hindi as an insult to Saivism. It went on to elaborate:

It can be generally said that if the Tamil people have tumbled into the Aryan trap and are unable to extricate themselves, it is because the Saivites are assisting the Aryans. ... It was because of this that Aryans achieved dominance in Tamil society through religion.... To this day, it is the Saivites who act as Hanumans in maintaining this dominance. We ask them: Should they not expiate for their past acts? There is no doubt that the ruthless rule of Achariar [Rajaji] [C. Rajagopalachari] will come to an end the very day that true Saivites attain at least an iota of Self-Respect and fight against their ‘satsudra’ status. And if Achariar is able to indulge in ruthless and foolhardy acts it is because he is certain that Saivites will not attain such consciousness very easily.

We see a shrewd mix of incitement and encouragement to both provoke and exhort Saivites to join hands with the Self-respect Movement to oppose Hindi. The basis on which the alliance was sought was anti-Brahminism and a threat to the Tamil language.

One ‘Sivapizhambu’ writing in Kudi Arasu reminded the Saivites of the hue and cry they had raised against the Self-respect Movement in the late 1920s, and asked sarcastically what they were going to do when the Brahmins were attacking Tamil which had been begotten by Lord Siva himself. One M.R. Mithiran of Dindigul wrote a verse epistle to Maraimalai Adigal requesting him to jump into the fray and join hands with S. S. Bharati in the fight against Hindi.

The call of the Self-respecters did not go unheeded. On the occasion of the annual celebrations at the Thirupathirippuliyur mutt, in June 1938, Gnaniyar Adigal said:

... A thousand years ago, Sanskrit came to Tamilnadu. We welcomed it. ... A few centuries ago, English came. We said, ‘Welcome’ and showed warm hospitality. What did we gain? Slowly these two languages devoured our Tamil language. Now Hindi too is coming. It is also going to be mandatory. Let it come and stay. Let Tamil be done away with; destroyed. Let Tamil lovers be abettors to this!

Such moving words uttered by a venerated scholar-saint could not be easily ignored. Even Thiru. Vi. Ka. [Thiru._V._Kalyanasundaram], who opposed the anti-Hindi agitation as it undermined the nationalist cause, was forced to publish this speech in his Navasakti.

An alliance between the Saivites and the Self-respect Movement was then struck and was marked by a series of meetings and conferences where both shared the platform. At the Third Selfrespect Conference in Thuraiyar, in August 1937, Periyar, Ponnambalanar, K. M. Balasubramaniam, C. N. Annadurai and K. A. P. Viswanatham spoke. In Madras, S. S. Bharati, Annadurai and K. M. Balasubramaniam spoke at an anti-Hindi meeting. K. M. Balasubramaniam, K. A. P. Viswanatham and C. N. Annadurai addressed the Third Salem District Self-respect Conference in October 1937.

S. S. Bharati went on an extended lecture tour of Tamilnadu calling for the repeal of compulsory Hindi. At Tirunelveli, C.N. Annadurai spoke on the platform of the Tamil Pathukappu Kazhagam [தமிழ் பாதுகாப்பு கழகம்] in October 1937, with M. S. Purnalingam Pillai in the chair, S. S. Bharati as a cospeaker and M.V. Nellaiyappa Pillai proposing a vote of thanks.

The Madras Provincial Conference, whose conferences usually teemed with Saivites, for its Third Conference at Tiruchi in December 1937, contained a fair proportion of Self-respect leaders like Periyar, C. N. Annadurai, Gurusami and Kunchitham. So was the Ramanathapuram District Tamil Conference, held in December 1938.

The Saivite journals were open to the Self-respecters and viceversa. The proceedings of the anti-Hindi agitation were reported at length, especially of the Saivite meetings, by Self-respect journals. Ezhathu Sivananda Adigal, on behalf of the Self-respect Movement, printed and distributed free, 15,000 copies of Maraimalai_Adigal’s book on 'Why Hindi should not be made the lingua franca of India’ [இந்தி பொது மொழியா].

The agitation against compulsory Hindi manifested views that both the Self-respect Movement and the Saivites shared. A classic instance is the inaugural lecture that T.V. Umamaheswaran Pillai delivered at the Tiruchi Tamil Conference in December 1937. Harking back to the great antiquity of Tamils, he ascribed their fall to Aryan conspiracy. The brazen actions of the Congress ministry and the vanity of Rajaji were identified with Brahminism and roundly condemned.

But the consensus that had been forged had its limits. The Self-respect Movement’s objectives were far-reaching, and the alliance with the Saivites had been arrived at only on an anti-brahmin platform to defend a commonly perceived threat to Tamil. The limits were clear even during the honeymoon at the Tiruchi conference. Periyar brought a resolution saying that the conference had lost confidence in the Governor as he had signed the Congress bill on Hindi. And, as the Kudi Arasu [குடி அரசு] remarked, many developed cold feet and Periyar’s resolution had to be dropped. A deputation to meet the Governor was then proposed. Periyar declined to be part of this deputation as he felt that the Governor would not intervene in this matter as the British had nothing to lose by mandatory Hindi.

This incident highlights the ambit of the consensus. The Self-respect Movement had far-reaching goals, and the anti-Hindi agitation was only one issue in its programme, and was not an end in itself as it was for the Saivites. Moreover, given its political experience, it was not averse to using coercive agitational tactics to achieve its programme. The Saivite elite could never think beyond safe, constitutional methods. It was only a sense of crisis and the threat of a common danger that had led to their alliance. With Congress relinquishing office after the outbreak of World War II and the repeal of compulsory Hindi, the stage was once again set for conflict. A tactical alliance could not hold when antagonistic ideological forces pulled at the sides."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Tinnevelly (Tamil திருநெல்வேலி): Gründung der தமிழ்ப் பாதுகாப்புக் கழகம் - Tamiḻp pātukāppuk kaḻakam (Society for the Protection of Tamil Language)

"The Tamiḻp pātukāppuk kaḻakam (Society for the Protection of Tamil), founded in Tirunelveli in 1937 by devotees associated with both the Shaiva Siddhanta Kazhagam and the Karanthai Tamil Sangam, issued a circular asking Tamil speakers to Tamilize their personal names and the names of their homes and workplaces, of streets and towns, of eating places, and so on. The circular ended with the words,

“Do service to Tamil and secure freedom”

(Visswanathan 1983: 197-99).

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 177. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): C. Rajagopalachari (Tamil சக்ரவர்தி ராஜகோபாலாச்சாரி - Cakravarti rājakōpālāccāri, 1878 - 1972) in einer Rede vor der Madras Christian College Union:

"We shall find ourselves handicapped and unable to take part in the federated India of the times to come, and we will be at a great disadvantage in every way if we do not know Hindi. It will affect our bread, our taxation and budgets, and many things will be done over our heads if we are not able to understand Hindustani."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 216. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Kanchipuram (Tamil காஞ்சிபுரம்): Anti-Hindi Conference.

Kurma Venkata Reddy Naidu (Telugu కూర్మా వెంకటరెడ్డి నాయుడు - Kūrmā Veṅkaṭareḍḍi Nāyuḍu, 1875 - 1942):

"Reddi Naidu an uncompromising critic of Rajaji [C. Rajagopalachari], questioned the very hypothesis that a common language was desirable for India, because the solidarity of the country depended, according to him, on factors other than language. At the Anti-Hindi Conference held at Kanchipuram in February 1938 he questioned whether a common language was essential and indispensable in a federal country like India for the assimilation of its people, for developing their sense of patriotism or for the solidarity of the nation. And he himself answered the question in the following manner;

Take, for instance, the case of Canada, which has a Federal form of Government and where two different languages, namely French and English have always been spoken. Take again, the case of South Africa where we find two different races, the English and the Dutch speaking two different languages, English and Afrikkaans, both officially recognized. Look at Switzerland, where we find three different races, speaking three different languages (yet) forming a single nation. By the Federal constitution of Switzerland of 1874 German, French and Italian are recognized as national languages, in spite of the fact that 71 per cent of the population speak German, 23 per cent speak French and only 5 or 6 per cent speak Italian."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 220. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Madras Presidency: Hindi wird Pflichtfremdsprache  von der 6. bis zur 8. Klasse in 125 Schulen.

"The premier [C. Rajagopalachari] ‘honestly believes,’ said A. T. Pannirselvam, a gifted opposition legislator,

‘that what he has set his mind upon is the will of the country’.

Contributing to the caste divide that so troubled CR [C. Rajagopalachari], this flaw, seen foremost in his Hindi policy, was seized upon by EVR [ E. V. Ramasamy].

We may never know whether this Hindi plan was a brainwave, a move to impress all of India, a compensation for CR’s own inability, hurting his right to nationwide leadership, to acquire fluency in the language, or something else.

In any case, in August 1937, within weeks of assuming office, his ministry declared that to equip South Indians for opportunities in the rest of the country, Hindi/Hindustani would be offered in schools. Later, in April 1938, a government order announced that Hindi/Hindustani would be taught in standards six to eight in 125 schools.

Students could choose either Devanagari or Urdu for writing the language, and failing an exam would not block promotion.

‘It is chutney on the leaf, taste it or leave it alone,’ said CR.

Opponents, however, called it poison, linked Hindi to CR the Brahmin, carried black flags to his meetings, denounced him daily in front of a few schools and his Mambalam home, and took out processions. On one occasion in Trichy, chappals were thrown at him.

The Hindi step brought the Justice Party and EVR closer to each other, accelerating a trend that had started in 1935. Pure Tamil advocates alleged that CR’s Tamil contained Sanskrit words. EVR and Saivite Vellalas put aside their differences. The Muslim League said that Hindi was Hindu. And EVR bonded with a brilliant young writer and journalist,  Conjeevaram Natarajan Annadurai (1909-69).

Born into the Sengundha Mudaliar caste where weaving was the traditional occupation, Annadurai was a writer for EVR’s Tamil weekly, Kudi Arasu, the Justice Party’s Tamil daily, Viduthalai [விடுதலை] (Freedom), which too had been handed over, early in 1937, to EVR, and for the Justice Party’s English journal, Justice. In 1936, he had stood as a twenty-seven-year-old on a Justice ticket for the Madras municipal corporation but lost.

On 5 September 1937, within weeks of the CR ministry’s first announcement that Hindi would be offered, Annadurai claimed at a public meeting at Soundarya Mahal in Madras that if Hindi was taught in the government’s 8,000 schools, at least 8,000 teachers of Hindi, all of them Brahmins, would find jobs.

Adding his voice to the agitation,  Pannirselvam claimed that Hindi to the Tamilian was

 ‘a foreign language, foreign in words, script, culture and tradition’.

Women took part in protest marches.

CR replied that fostering communal hatred injured ‘the national heart’. Yet he was unwise in at least two of his responses. Employing a provision in the law the British had used to combat picketing of shops selling toddy and foreign cloth, CR authorized non-bailable arrests of violators of his government’s bans.

When CR dismissed his governor’s advice against the step, Erskine wrote to the viceroy that it was

‘no business of mine to keep the Congress party popular’.

Indian Express and Swadesamitran [Tamil சுதேசமித்திரன்], both pro-Congress, counselled CR not to copy the Raj, as did Gandhi from afar, but CR was not budging.

A second mistake was to reject advice from Satyamurti and the educator-philosopher Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan to allow a parent to withdraw a child from the Hindi class.

It was in a climate of passion, confrontation and arrests that a Madras meeting called by the women’s wing of the Self-Respect Movement resolved that EVR would henceforth be called Periyar [பெரியார்], the great or big one. Held in mid-November 1938 and attended by hundreds of women, the meeting was chaired by Neelambigai Ammaiyar [நீலாம்பிகை அம்மையார், 1903 - 1945], daughter of the Saivite champion of pure Tamil, Maraimalai Adigal.

Yet Adigal’s own remarks in 1939 suggested not only aloofness from Hindi but a troubling disdain for other southern languages:

A language loses its vitality [and] a class of people becomes disintegrated and weak by harmful admixture... The once strong well-knit group of Tamils has, by corruption of their language, become the disjointed and decaying groups of Malayalees, Telugus _ etc.

By end-January 1939, 683 participants in the anti-Hindi movement, including EVR, Annadurai and 36 women, had been convicted for terms ranging from sixteen weeks to a year. Among them were 173 persons prosecuted for activity in front of CR’s house.

Six weeks after being formally addressed as Periyar, EVR, who had received a one-year sentence, was made the Justice Party president in absentia at a convention in Madras, where a fiery message he sent out from Bellary Jail was read out. Calling Brahmins ‘mosquitoes’, ‘bugs’ and ‘Jews’, EVR touched also on the abolition of zamindari proposed by the Congress, which the Justice Party had opposed. Abolishing the reign of priests was more important, EVR said.

The Justice Party asked for ‘Tamilnad’ to be made a distinct and separate state, loyal to the British Raj, and ‘directly under the Secretary of State for India’.

Questioned in the Assembly about EVR’s condition in Bellary’s prison, CR replied:

It is a good jail. I claim to be a personal friend of Mr. Naicker, though a very bitter political opponent. He knows that I am, so far as I can be, kind and considerate to him.

CR’s repartees in the assembly did not go down well with everyone. Some wanted greater public warmth from the premier for an unwell Periyar.

After months of demonstrations, intensity dropped. In May 1939, EVR was released on medical grounds, and Annadurai and all the others detained were also freed.

‘I have received exceptionally kind treatment,’ Periyar said when he came out."

[Quelle: Rajmohan Gandhi (Hindi राजमोहन गांधी, 1935 - ): Modern South India : A history from the 17th century to our times. -- New Delhi : Aleph, 2018. -- S. 299 - 302. -- Fair use]

Government Order zu Hindi:

"The attainment by our province of its rightful place in the national life of India requires that our educated youths should possess a working knowledge of the most widely spoken language in India. Government have therefore decided upon the introduction of Hindustani in the secondary school curriculum of our Province. Government desire to make it clear that Hindustani is not to he introduced in any elementary school whatsoever, the mother tongue being the only language taught in such schools. Hindustani is to be introduced only in secondary schools and there too, only in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd forms, that is to say, in the 6th, 7th and 8th years of school life. It will not interfere in any way with the teaching of the mother tongue in the secondary schools. The study of the mother tongue will continue to be enforced as before, and promotions from class to class will not be affected by failure of proficiency in Hindustani, but will depend, as before, on the general proficiency and marks obtained in other subjects including the mother tongue. Hindustani will be compulsory only in the sense that attendance in such classes will be compulsory and pupils cannot take Hindustani as a substitute for Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam or Kannada, but must learn Hindustani only in addition to one of these languages."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 228f. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Stalin Jegadeesan (Tamil ஸ்டாலின் ஜெகதீசன் - Sṭāliṉ jekatīcaṉ) beginnt Fasten gegen die Einführung von Hindi in Madras Presidency

"Along with Dhalamutthu [தாலமுத்து, 1925 - 1939] and Natarajan [இல. நடராசன், 1919 - 1939], these early protests against Hindi also produced another martyr in a young man who called himself Stalin Jegadeesan. On 1 May 1938, he started a fast, demanding the cancellation of the government’s Hindi legislation. He was frequently put on display at anti-Hindi meetings, and his photograph was periodically published in sympathetic newspapers. A statement issued by him, published in the Vitutalai [விடுதலை], had him declaring that he had gone on his fast to prove to Hindi supporters that Tamiḻttāy [தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] still had loyal sons:

“I will return with our Tamilannai [தமிழன்னை] [Tamilttay], or I will die,”

he concluded.

Following his example, another man, named Ponnusami [பொன்னுசாமி], also went on a fast on 1 June in front of Rajagopalachari’s residence, sitting under a tree and carrying the Tamil banner (with its characteristic emblems of the tiger, the bow, and the fish, signifying the ancient Tamil dynasties of the Chola, Chera, and Pandya). He is reported to have declared:

“I shall fast unto death; even if released from jail I shall go and fast and die in front of the Premier’s house. If Jagadeesan should die . . . [a] thousand lives should go for it.”

Some anti-Hindi leaders such as Ramasami rejected fasting as a form of protest; others such as Annadurai used the example of Jegadeesan to spur Tamil speakers to join the cause. At an anti-Hindi meeting in 1938, Annadurai thundered,

 “If Jegadeesan dies, I am ready to take his place, and die along with ten other persons. As soon as Jegadeesan dies, you should also be prepared to die.”

Jegadeesan, however, did not die; on the contrary, it was reported that he had been stealthily eating at night all along, and his fast was called off after about ten weeks (Nambi Arooran 1980: 208-10; Visswanathan 1983: 201-5)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 230. -- Fair use]


Die Andhra Zeitschrift "Social Reformer":

"An Andhra journal, the Social Reformer, in a trenchant article warned the people to be on their guard against the empire building designs of the North Indians and said,

... it is better that Andhras too say plainly that except the political freedom movement of Mr Gandhi, we do no want any of this silent empire building schemes to side-track us in our helpless movements. We may not love English but we love Hindi (the) least which cannot stand equal in status with our highly developed and ancient mother tongue .... Those that want it may learn it, but let them no more tack it to the swaraj issue .... If people do not say so publicly .... it is because they are all mesmerized on the whole some issue of swaraj and there has been no sufficient awakening in them through proper propaganda of the implications of Gandhi an side issues ...."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 236. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Eine der unzähligen Anti-Hindi-Demonstrationen.

"In August 1938, at an anti-Hindi gathering in Madras, the lead speaker, Pavalar Balasundaram [பாவலர் பாலசுந்தரம்], asked his audience,

“What is to be done with the Brahman community which is killing our [Tamiḻttāy - Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil]?”

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 195. -- Fair use]

"Consider the fate of M. Raghava Aiyangar, a leading member of the Madurai Tamil Sangam, who between 1905 and 1910 helped edit its famed journal, Centamil [செந்தமிழ்]. In 1913, Raghava Aiyangar was appointed as the chief Tamil pandit in the committee set up to produce the multivolume Tamil Lexicon, and he received the prestigious title of Rao Sahib in 1936 for his efforts. In addition, he wrote several historical and literary theses in a compensatory classicist vein, many critical commentaries, and a study of the ancient grammar, Tolkāppiyam (Zvelebil 1992: 203-5). The latter in particular was severely attacked within the devotional community, by contestatory classicists as well as Dravidianists, for its portrayal of the sexual morality of ancient Tamilians (Maraimalai Adigal 1936b; Pulavar Kulanthai 1958: 22-23). In August 1938, at an anti-Hindi rally held in Madras, Pavalar Balasundaram [பாவலர் பாலசுந்தரம்] fumed:

Raghava Ayyangar has written a commentary on Tolkappiyam. ... I shall read to you what he has written. . . .

“Tamilian women of those days were flirting with whomsoever they came across; the Aryans taught and gave them education to be chaste. . . .”

How dare he write like this? Today, it is the Brahman who plays the part of pimps.. . . [W]ith whom have our women flirted? Can a Tamilian who keeps quiet after this claim to be a human being? . . . Who can put up with such an insult? . . . Are not the Tamilian women our mother [sic]?"

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 195f.. -- Fair use]

1938-08-01 - 1938-09-11

Trichinopoly (Tamil திருச்சிராப்பள்ளி): Anti-Hindi Marsch nach Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்) der தமிழர் படை - Tamiḻar paṭai (Tamilian Brigade).

Abb.: Route Map of Anti-Hindi March
[Bildquelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- nach S. 238. -- Online: -- Fair use]

"The most spectacular of these protest marches was the one undertaken by the tamilar patai [தமிழர் படை], the “Tamilian Brigade,” in August-September 1938. Jointly organized by the Self-Respect movement and the Muslim League, the brigade of a hundred or so young men set out from Tiruchirappalli on 1 August, under the stewardship of Kumaraswami Pillai and Ramamirtham Ammal. During the next forty-two days, members of the brigade walked through 234 villages and 60 towns; and  they addressed eighty-seven public meetings attended by at least half a million. Opposition newspapers carried daily news of the brigade’s progress and noted the “rousing reception” it received in various towns and villages of the Presidency on its six-hundred-mile trek. In September 1938 it finally reached Madras, where many of its members joined the picketing activities in the city and were arrested. Not the least of the consequences of the march of the anti-Hindi brigade (which, contemporaries did not fail to note, resembled Gandhi’s famous march to Dandi, and Rajagopalachari’s to Vedaranyam in 1930) was the formation in smaller towns and villages of similar brigades, which took up the cause of spreading the anti-Hindi and pro-Tamil message (Ilanceliyan 1986: 114-23; Visswanathan 1983: 211-13)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 176f. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Eine der unzähligen Anti-Hindi-Demonstrationen.

"So declared a twenty-three-year-old youth at an anti-Hindi rally in Madras city in 1938:

“If the Tamilians have any heroism, the blood of several thousands of members of the Aryan race must be shed. The blood of the Aryans must be shed and a river of blood should flow in this country. The leaders may not have faith in violence, but we have faith in violence.. . . [T]housands of youths will arise for planting our red flag, and giving up their lives for the sake of Tamil.”

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 112. -- Fair use]


Tamilnad Women's Conference, organisiert von Frau Annai Meenambal Shivaraj (Tamil அன்னை மீனாம்பாள் சிவராஜ் - Aṉṉai Mīṉāmpāḷ Civarāj, 1904 - 1992). Anti-Hindi. Die Konferenz verleiht  E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) den Titel Periyar (Tamil பெரியார் - der Große)

"At the 1938 Tamilnadu Women’s Conference which  Nilambikai [Tamil திருவரங்க நீலாம்பிகை, 1903 - 1945] addressed, another woman spoke with great passion about the need for Tamil women to “rise up in anger” and step forth to help their ailing mother, Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil]. Her name was V. P. Thamaraikanni (1911-71). Named Jalajatchi at birth, she was raised in a family of musicians and patrons of Tamil, and later Tamilized her given (Sanskritic) name. An author of many essays and novels, she did not get actively involved in politics, because both her father and husband were government employees (Lakshmi 1984: 77-78; Rajagopalan 1989: 5-7). By the late 1930s, however, she aligned herself with Ramasami’s Self-Respect movement and was a key speaker at many anti-Hindi conferences organized in Madras, Salem, Velur, Nagapattinam, and elsewhere. In 1938, she also published a short story called “Punitavati Allatu Tamilar Vitutalaip Por” [புனிதவதி அல்லது தமிழர் விடுதலைப்
போர்] (Punithavathi, or the Tamilian fight for freedom), which features a heroine, Punithavathi, who forsook her husband and her young daughter to help Tamilttay, and was arrested in this process (Ramaswamy 1992a: 53-56). Thamaraikanni’s spirited heroine asks,

 “What is the use of wealth, of freedom, and of human relationships, when I can be in the front ranks of those who serve Tamilttay?” (Thamaraikanni 1938: 21).

Thamaraikanni herself did not go to prison on behalf of her beloved language. But many other women did, following her impassioned speech at the November conference. This was the first time women— anywhere in the world, by some reckoning—had ever taken to the streets to battle on behalf of their “mother tongue,” it is proudly claimed. By February 1939, the battle against Hindi had intensified, and official figures show that thirty-six women, nine of them described as “ladies with children,” were arrested and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment; these figures almost doubled over the next few months (Ramaswamy 1992a: 56-57). Prison records show that many of the women had distinctly Tamil names; their ages ranged from eighteen to seventy; they were mostly illiterate and unemployed, and hailed from different parts of the Presidency. Devotional stories collapse their individuality into a larger narrative of Tamil devotion. Many of them are identified as daughters, wives, or daughters-in-law of well-known (male) anti-Hindi activists; as mothers, many of whom went to prison with their infant children; and as women who took pride in informing their sentencing judges that they were protesting against Hindi for the sake of their language and for the future of their children (Ilanceliyan 1986: 143-48)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 187f. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Es erscheint

Shaktidasan Subramnian (சக்திதாசன் சுப்பிரமணியன் - Caktitācaṉ cuppiramaṇiyaṉ) : தமிழ் வெறி - Tamiḻ veṟi (Passion for Tamil). -- Madras, 1939

“[Our] mind is Tamil;
[our] entire body is Tamil;
[our] life is Tamil;
[our] pulse is Tamil;
[our] veins are Tamil;
 [our] flesh, muscle, everything is Tamil;
everything in [our] body is Tamil, Tamil, Tamil”

(S. Subramanian 1939: 15-16).

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 6. -- Fair use]


Tod von Natarajan (Tamil இல. நடராசன் - Ila. Naṭarācaṉ, 1919 - 1939), Tamil-"Märtyrer"

"If a populist political movement reaches its apogee when it gains its first martyrs, tamiḻppaṟṟu  [தமிழ்ப்பற்று - devotion to Tamil] attained that moment in 1939. Early that year, two young men, Natarajan and Dhalamutthu [தாலமுத்து, 1925 - 1939], died in prison, having been arrested along with numerous others for joining the anti-Hindi picketing in front of the Hindu Theological High School in Madras city. The government was quick to point out that both men had been in poor health when they had entered the prison, and that they died of cellulitis and amebic dysentery. In devotional writings, however, their deaths are presented as heroic sacrifices to the Tamil cause, and over the years these men have attained the status of devotees who selflessly gave up their lives for their language (Annadurai 1985: 34-36, 56-57; Karunanidhi 1989: 196-207; Parthasarathy 1986: 410-37). Their funeral processions in Madras city were attended by hundreds of mourners and marked by fiery speeches celebrating their martyrdom. Annadurai proclaimed that Natarajan’s name and deeds had to be inscribed in gold in the history of the world. Another admirer, Kanchi Rajagopalachari, a maverick Brahman in the Justice Party and archcritic of the government, declared that never before even in the glorious history of ancient Tamilnadu had anyone sacrificed his life for his language, predicting that Natarajan’s grave would become a hallowed site for all true Tamilians. Natarajan’s father, we are told, declared that his son’s spirit lived on in all true Tamilians and invited them to continue the battle for Tamil rights (Iraiyan 1981: 108).


Natarajan, government sources note in passing, was an illiterate twenty-year-old “Adi-Dravida” carpenter and a native of Madras. He was arrested on 5 December 1938, fell ill and was admitted  to the hospital on 30 December, and died on 15 January 1939. The 22 January issue of the Sunday Observer carried an interview with K. Lakshmanan, young Natarajan’s father, in which he declared that his son often sang religious and anti-Hindi songs at home. Three days prior to his arrest, his son had expressed his desire to go to jail for the sake of Tamil. Lakshmanan also said that when his son was hospitalized, he was told by the authorities that if he submitted an apology for his activities, he would be released from prison. But Natarajan refused. In its editorial of 22 January, the Nakaratutan declared that Natarajan, filled with “love for Tamil,” preferred to die a honorable death in prison rather than agree to a dishonorable release (Ilanceliyan 1986: 171-72; Visswanathan 1983: 244-47)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 229f. -- Fair use]


Madras Presidency: Aus einer Tamil-Ansprache gegen C. Rajagopalachari (Tamil சக்ரவர்தி ராஜகோபாலாச்சாரி, 1878 - 1972):

"He was also described as a “pimp” who married his daughter [இலட்சுமி - Lakshmi] off to the North Indian, Gandhi’s son [Devdas Gandhi]: 

"This ungrateful Rajagopalachari who is baser than a dog, who was born in the coterie which came to beg, who is wearing dark spectacles and who has become a minister by playing the pimp of his daughter, is trying to play the pimp for his [Brahman] community”

(English transcription of Tamil speech; Government of Madras Order No. 549 [Public], 1 April 1939)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 269, Anm. 17. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Tamil Marriage Conference

"As part of its larger programme for a socially just and egalitarian society, the marriage-system also came under the Self-respect Movement’s attack. The prevailing system of marriages was condemned as patriarchal, Aryan, devised to serve the needs of Brahmin priests. To this system, the Self-respect Movement counter-posed a new form of marriage which emphasised the contractual nature of the relationship and the equality of man and woman in it. This new system did away with Brahmin officiation, rituals and even the thali [தாலி], the wedding chain tied around the neck of the bride. The radical nature of Self-respect marriages is, thus, too evident to need restatement.

While the anti-brahmin nature of Self-respect marriage was welcome to the Saivites, its other aspects, especially the antireligious and anti-patriarchal content were anathema. In July 1939, a Tamil Marriage Conference was conducted in Madras. Presided over by Maraimalai Adigal, the speakers included K. Subramania Pillai, S. S. Bharati and T.V. Umamaheswaran Pillai—the very same personalities who had spearheaded the Saivite vanguard of the anti-Hindi agitation. In the Conference, it was emphasised that present-day marriages were full of embellishments introduced by Aryan Brahmins after their infiltration into Tamil society. The ancient Tamil practice of marriage based on love was to be emulated. Brahmin officiation and Sanskrit incantations were to be abolished. Simple marriages, in the presence of elders, by the tying of the thali was to be the basis of the Tamil system of marriage."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]

1939-10-27 - 1939-11-15

Rücktritt aller Congress Minister

Auf Anweisung des  Indian National Congress lauten die Rücktrittserklärungen:

“This Assembly recommends to the Government to convey to the Government of India and though them to the British Government that in consonance with the avowed aims of the present war, it is essential in order to secure the co-operation of the Indian people that the principles of democracy with effective safegurads for the Muslims and other minorities be applied to India and her policy be guided by her people ; and that Tndia should be regarded as an independent nation entitled to frame her own Constitution and further that suitable action should be taken in so far as it is possible in the immediate present to give effect to that principle in regard to present governance of India.

This Assembly regrets that die situation in India has not been rightly understood by His Majesty’s Government when authorising the statement that has been made on their behalf in regard to India and in view of this failure of the British Government to meet India’s demand, this Assembly is of opinion that the Government cannot associate itself with British policy.”


தமிழர் சமய மாநாடு - Tamiḻar Camaya Mānāṭu  = Conference of Tamil Religion

"Following this, in 1940, the Saivites organised the Tamilar Samaya Manadu (Conference of Tamil Religion). Here too, Maraimalai Adigal, S. S. Bharati and K. Subramania Pillai gave shape to the Saivite response. The Self-respect Movement interpreted the pre-Aryan Tamil society in secular terms. A golden age of a harmonious society, devoid of religion and caste, was portrayed as the ideal that was to be recreated. The Saivite conception went only halfway. Pre-Aryan Tamil society, in this view, was a Vellalar civilisation. Saivism was its religion. Caste distinctions based on birth, rituals and priesthood were Aryan accretions. And some of the best elements of Aryan-Brahminism were actually the product of Tamil genius which had been appropriated from Saivism. These views were put forward in the Conference and colonial Hindu laws were condemned for their Aryan bias. During the course of the conference some Self-respect activists stormed in and tried to debate the resolutions, causing chaos. The Self-respect Movement also responded, in writing, to the Saivite view expressed in the Conference.

Such incidents of Self-respecters gate-crashing into Saivite meetings were more or less regular affairs, and were seen more as a nuisance than as real challenges to the Saivite view. For instance, at the Salem Sentamil Conference, presided over by Maraimalai Adigal, in October 1944, Era. Neduncheliyan

‘spoke insultingly of Saiva religion and temple worship and offended the audience which rose against him. He and his self-respecters caused great commotion.’"

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


 Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) in der Tamil Zeitschrift குடி அரசு (Kudi Arasu):

"Two years of Congress which was so Aryan ridden, could not but create a sense of despair in the minds of all non-Aryans ....It is but a natural desire on the part of the Muslims to live as a separate nation....Mr Jinnah’s arguments for this partition are cogent and unassailable and there is nothing wrong in that claim."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 313. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Salem (Tamil சேலம்): Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) in einer Ansprache:

"In that speech Naicker declared that non-Brahmans would merge with Congress if it 'guaranteed a due share of power’ to them without elucidating or elaborating what then would be the Justicite stand on the Dravidanad issue and the future role of their party in politics. Towards the conclusion of this speech he returned to his favourite theme of social justice and said

the monopoly of the intellectual classes (Brahmans) should cease. When they (non-Brahmans) asked for separate electorates a hue and cry was raised and it was said (that) it would mean division of the community on unhealthy lines, but the same thing was not said when non-Brahmans were dubbed as sudras and inferiors and allotted separate places in Brahmin coffee hotels. That pernicious distinction was being observed in railway refreshment rooms also and the sooner the practice was abandoned the better .

True to his statement, Naicker started a local agitation at Trichinopoly protesting against the exclusive dining arrangements made for Brahman passengers in the railway restaurants and succeeded in abolishing this practice in May 1941"

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 327f. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Es erscheint:

Maraimalai_Adigal  (Tamil மறைமலை அடிகள், 1876 - 1950): தமிழர் மதம் - Tamiḻar matam (Tamilian creed). -- Pallavaram : Eigenverlag, 1941. -- 316 . -- Online: Tamilar Madham - Contents Page (

"English preface to the Tamilian Creed":

Wilfred Scawen Blunt says that Huxley had long suspected a common origin of the Egyptians and the Dravidians of India, perhaps a long belt of brown skinned men from India to Spain in very early days.

“This ‘belt’ of Huxley’s, of dark-white and brown-skinned men, this race of brunet-brown-folk, spread even farther than India; they reached to the shores of the Pacific, and they were everywhere the original possessors of the Neolithic culture and the beginners of what we call civilization. It is possible that these Brunet peoples are, so to speak the basic peoples of our modern world.”

H. G. Wells in his 'Outline of History' P.138.

What had been suspected by the genius of Prof. Huxley and accepted by Mr. H.G. Wells, has recently come off an undoubted fact established by the archaeological evidence which the excavations conducted at Harappa and Mohenjo daro  in the Punjab have afforded us. For Sir John Marshall, Director General of Archaeology in India has conclusively shown in his epoch-making work ”Mohenjo daro and the Indus Civilization” that the pre-Aryan people, the originators of the Indus Civilisation could be none other than the forefathers of the Dravidian people who at present occupy Southern India and that their culture bears a close resemblance to the culture of the Sumerians and the Egyptians as the result of the commercial intercourse they had had with the latter five thousand years ago. In exposing the error into which some of the oriental scholars had fallen when they came to speak of the pre-Aryan inhabitants of India. Sir John Marshall observes,

“They (the orientalists) pictured the pre-Aryans as little more than untutored savages (whom it would have been grotesque to credit with any reasoned scheme of religion or philosophy). Now that our knowledge of them has been revolutionized and we are constrained to recognize them as no less highly civilized-in some respects, indeed, more highly civilized-than the contemporary Sumerians or Egyptians, it behoves us to re-draw the picture afresh and revise existing misconceptions regarding their religion as well as their material culture.”

And in another place of his remarkable work he says:

“The Indus civilization was pre-Aryan and the Indus language or languages must have been Pre-Aryan also. Possibly, one or other of them (if, as seems likely, there was more than one) was Dravidic. This, for three reasons, seems a most likely conjecture-first, because Dravidic speaking people were the precursors of the Aryans over most of Northern India and were the only people likely to have been in possession of a culture as advanced as the Indus culture; secondly, because on the other side of the Krithar Range and at no great distance from the Indus valley, the Brahuis of Baluchistan have preserved among themselves an island of Dravidic speech which may well be a relic of pre-Aryan times, when Dravidic was perhaps the common language of these parts; thirdly, because the Dravidic languages being agglutinative it is not unreasonable to look for a possible connection between them and the agglutinative language of Sumer in the Indus valley, which as we know, had many other close ties with Sumer.”

So much precaution and reservation with which the above statement made by Sir John Marshall as regards, the high antiquity of the Dravidian people, their language and culture, may seem unnecessary to those who possess an intimate knowledge of ancient Tamil literature, some of the extant works of which such as Tolkappiyam, Paripadal, Purananooru and others date from 3500 B.C. to the first century A.D. and bear witness to the high level of civilization which the Tamils reached in pre-Aryan times. Certainly there could have been at that remote period none but one Dravidian language spoken not only all over India but even beyond its frontiers, and that language could have been no other than Tamil which still lives among twenty million people in all its literary glory and usefulness. Except Tamil no other Dravidian language possesses such vast, antique, varied, original, valuable literature, the literatures of the other few cultivated Dravidian tongues such as Kanarese, Telugu and Malayalam being not more than seven or eight hundred years old at most and even these consist of works either translated from Sanscrit or written in imitation of some Sanscrit works, it is an admitted fact that that language alone which possesses grammar and literature that forms the only criterion to estimate the height of civilization to which the people who owned them had attained. If in India of pre-Aryan times, there had existed no literary work that could be brought forward from any of the existing Dravidian languages except Tamil, then it is as certain as two and two makes four, that that language did not exist at that time or if it could be assumed that it did exist, it was not cultivated by a civilized people in any way. For the life of a civilized nation cannot get on without the cultivation of its language and the production of a varied literature. If Sir John Marshall had had a first hand knowledge of the Tholkappiam and some other ancient classics of Tamil, he would have easily shown in corroboration of what he stated as regards the pre-Aryan antiquity of one of the Dravidian language, that Tamil alone, and not any other as he vaguely affirmed, must have been the language spoken and cultivated by the pre-Aryan inhabitants of the Indus valley. Still, he has benefited the historians of the antique past by producing solid and substantial evidence in proof of the Tamilian civilization which was contemporaneous with the civilizations of the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Sumerians and other ancient nations of the west. Fortunately we are now in a position strong and unshakable to correlate with the above archaeological evidence, the proofs afforded by the ancient and genuine literary works of the Tamil language."

[Quelle: paper_07 PDF ( -- Zugriff am 2021-10-22]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Es erscheint:

K. Appadurai (Tamil கே. அப்பாதுரை - Kē. Appāturai, 1907 - 1989): குமரிக் கண்டம் அல்லது கடல் கொண்ட தென்னடு - Kumarik kaṇṭam allatu kaṭal koṇṭa teṉṉaṭu [Kumarikkantam Or, the southern land seized by the ozean]. -- Chennai : South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society, 1941

"In 1941 K. Appadurai (1907-89) published the first monograph in Tamil on Lemuria, revealingly titled Kumarikkantam allatu katal konta tennatu (Kumarikkantam, Or the Southern Land Seized by the Ocean), a book that continues to be in print still today. Although the bulk of the book is based on the life and times of the Tamils of Kumarikkantam, which is, in turn (bizarrely enough), modeled on the life and times of Cervé’s [= Harvey Spencer Lewis, 1883 - 1939] Pacific Lemurians [Lemuria: The Lost Continent of the Pacific by Wishar Cervé and James Ward (] (a fact left unacknowledged by the author), the two maps included in the monograph are derived from the Theosophical cartographies of Scott-Elliot. Entitled “Ilemuria: Pantai Nilai” (Lemuria: Ancient State) and “Ilemuria: Kurukiya Nilai” [இலெமூரிய: பண்டை நிலை] (Lemuria: Shrunken State), they are near translations into Tamil of Scott-Elliot’s 1904 world maps that showed the giant continent of Lemuria sprawled virtually across the entire earth. But there is one important difference. The continent—which is left unlabeled by Scott-Elliot—is now explicitly identified as “Kumarikkantam,” the Tamil orthography boldly etched across the part of the map that lies directly to the south of present-day India. And it is in this form that Scott-Elliot’s original occult maps have circulated in Tamil India since the 1940s, as Appadurai’s cartographic (re)creations have been reprinted several times, including in the 1975 college textbook published by the state government that I discussed at the end of the previous chapter."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S.  209f. -- Fair use]


Eine Delegation der Justice Party trifft Sir Richard Stafford Cripps (1889 - 1952) und die übrigen Mitglieder der Cripps Mission:

"On the announcement of the Cripps Mission Naicker hurriedly consulted some of the members of the committee who were supposed to frame a constitution for the Dravidian state and discussed with them the desirability of sending a Justice delegation to present their case. Accordingly a delegation consisting of Ramasami Naicker, Soundrapandiya Nadar, Samiappa Mudaliar and Muthiah Chettiar met the members of the Cripps Mission on 50 March 1942 and placed before them the Justice Party case for demanding a separate nation for the Dravidians.

According to Sir Stafford Cripps, the members of the Justice Party delegation impressed on him that the Presidency of Madras should secede from the Indian Union and form itself into a separate union so that the large majority of the non-Brahmans could save themselves from domination by the ’more wealthy and powerful Brahmin population' and obtain political power. This the members of the delegation were not confident of achieving either by a vote in the local legislative assembly or by plebiscite, since in both cases they feared that they would be outmanoeuvred by ’powerful elements'. Therefore to offset this disadvantage the delegation wanted separate electorates ’on such a scale as to give them automatically the majority in the Province'. As this was an ’impracticable suggestion’ opposed to democratic traditions. Cripps felt that the solution was not in separate electorates but in organization and leadership of the Justice Party so that it could persuade the people of Madras to vote for seceding from the Indian Union. He pointed out

.....this was a wholly impracticable suggestion and that it would raise the whole question of communal electorates as well, and that until such time as they could persuade the people of Madras to vote in their favour it was not possible within any democratic method at all to give them that majority which they desired. They appreciated this situation but were nevertheless insistent that something should be done to assist them. I pointed out, as sympathetically as possible, that in existing circumstances there was nothing we could do.

Although no party records are available on the interview of the Justice Party delegation with the members of the Cripps Mission, according to the presidential address delivered by Soundrapandiya Nadar at the South Arcot District Justice Party Conference, held on 14 April 1942, at Cuddalore, the members of the delegation pressed for the separation of Dravidanad from the rest of India and urged that until a decision was taken on that issue the non-Brahmans in the presidency should be given separate electorates. According to Nadar the members of the Mission seemed to have 'sympathetically viewed’ the Justicite demands. But on the question or separate electorates for non-Brahmans Sir Stafford Cripps seemed to have expressed the view that 'it was not easy of realization'."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 329f. -- Online: -- Fair use]


Die  Cripps Mission ist gescheitert, Cripps kehrt nach London zurück.


Tirukalukundram (Tamil திருக்கழுகுன்றம்): Tod von U._V._Swaminatha_Iyer (Tamil உ. வே. சாமிநாதையர் - U. Vē. Cāminātaiyar, 1855 - 1942), "தமிழ்த் தாத்தா" - "Tamiḻt tāttā" = "Großvater Tamil"

Abb.: Briefmarke, 2006
[Wikimedia / GODL]

"Few narratives offer a more strikingly poignant portrayal of one devotee’s struggle to pursue scholarship in Tamil under circumstances that were both materially daunting and socially discouraging than Swaminatha Aiyar’s En Carittiram [என் சரித்திரம்] (My story). As a young man, Swaminathan recalls a visitor asking his father:

“‘What does your son do?’ My father replied, ‘He reads Tamil.’ Stunned, as if he had heard something incredible, he burst out, ‘What? Tamil?’ He did not stop there. ‘He reads Tamil? Why could he not study English? And how about Sanskrit? If he studies English, he would benefit in this world. The study of Sanskrit will prepare him for the other world. Studying Tamil will bring him neither benefit’”

(Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 262). The visitor was not alone in thinking thus. Several of Swaminathan’s Brahman kinsmen urged him to study either Sanskrit or the more profitable English. But for him, as he wrote later, the motto of his life had been prefigured by the anonymous author of the seventeenth-century poem Tamil Vitututu [தமிழ் விடு தூது - Online: maturaic cokkanAtar tamiz viTu tUtu (in tamil script, unicode format) (]:

“O preeminent Tamil! I exist because of you! / Even the ambrosia of the celestials, I do not desire!” (Swaminatha Aiyar 1991b: 127).

A native of Uthamadhanapuram in Tanjavur district, Swaminathan was born in 1855 and raised as a devout Smarta Brahman. His father made his (meager) livelihood through giving music performances and religious discourses in the Thanjavur hinterlands. Although supportive in most ways, his father wished that Swaminathan would follow in his footsteps and would study music and the Telugu language that was most appropriate for a career as musician. But Swaminathan tells us,

 “Contrary to everyone’s desires, from the time I was a young man, my mind was immersed in the beauties of the goddess Tamil (tamilt teyvam [Tamiḻ teyvam [தமிழ் தெய்வம் = goddess Tamil]). More and more, it yearned for Tamiḻttāy's [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil] auspicious grace (tiruvarul [திருவருள்]). Sanskrit, Telugu, English—none of these held my interest. Sometimes, I even felt a deep aversion towards them. . . . Tamil had captured my heart” (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 156).

And Tamil had indeed captured his heart, for there appears to have been space for little else in his life, at least as it is narrativized in his reminiscences. He seems to have been attached to his parents, later even turning down an opportunity to teach in the prestigious Presidency College in Madras city so that they could spend their last days in their beloved Kaveri Valley. The birth of his first son is noted, with some joy. But in the seven-hundred-odd pages of his autobiography, his wife, Madurambikai [மதுராம்பிகை], does not feature at all, apart from a brief mention on the occasion of their marriage in 1868. Even that important rite of passage left him unmoved.

“It does not appear as if anything new has happened to me, now that I have become a householder.”

For a few days, before and after the occasion, he was filled with great joy, revelling in all the attention—and gifts (!)—he received. Then he soon realized that

“there was little gain from all this. I have only one purpose. Tamil is my wealth. It is the food for the hunger of my mind. ... It was true then. It is true now.”

So he concludes his brief discussion of his marriage (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 123-30).

The absence of details about his personal life is in striking contrast to the wealth of information he provides on the world of Tamil scholarship around the turn of this century. As he tells us on several occasions, he had no worldly interests other than the desire to study Tamil and to spend his time in the company of other Tamil scholars. He got ample opportunity to do so when he apprenticed himself around 1871 to Meenakshisundaram Pillai (1815-1876), perhaps the best-known Tamil savant of his time, on whom he later published a detailed biography. His relationship with his teacher, as he presents it in his reminiscences, echoes his relationship to the language; it was marked by intense reverence, devotion, even love. He recalls how he walked once, in the hot noonday sun, to another village, about two miles away, in order to procure a manuscript that he thought his master would like to see (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 193-94). He lapped up eagerly even the smallest word of praise that his master would throw his way, was jealous of fellow students who he feared may make their way into his master’s heart, and constantly worried about falling out of favor.

By his own reckoning, Swaminathan’s life took a dramatic turn on 21 October 1880, the day he met Ramasami Mudaliar, the munsif (civil judge) of Kumbakonam. By then, much had happened in his life. His master had died; he himself had moved to Kumbakonam, where he had secured a job teaching Tamil in the government college; he had an infant son; and he had already begun to acquire quite a name for himself in Tamil scholarly circles. Flushed with pride over his accomplishments, he set out to meet Ramasami Mudaliar, who he had heard was a Tamil enthusiast. Quizzed on the depth of his knowledge, Swaminathan tells us that he proudly rattled off the names of the numerous texts that he had learned by heart. Ramasami Mudaliar, however, was unimpressed.

“What is the use of knowing all this.. . . These are all later works. Do you know any of the ancient ones?” he asked.

A week later, he handed Swaminathan a manuscript of the ancient epic poem Cīvaka Cintāmaṇi, which he had never before seen. Humbled by the realization of how much more there was to know, he began the quest for other such old texts that changed the course of his life (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 528-34)-

As he recalls, this of course was no easy matter. Frequently relying on word-of-mouth information about manuscript collections in remote villages, he would walk for miles down country roads, sometimes riding bullock carts which broke down, at other times taking trains (one of the few signs in his autobiography, we note, of industrial modernity). On these trips—the equivalent of other people’s holy pilgrimages—he would sometimes encounter wonderful people who filled him with awe and joy because of their obvious reverence for Tamil, and because of the care with which they had maintained old Tamil manuscripts; their abodes, he writes, were “temples of the goddess Tamil (Tamiḻ teyvam [தமிழ் தெய்வம் = goddess Tamil])” (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 636-38, 690-94). More often, he came across signs of utter callousness, and with horror he recounts stories of old manuscripts being cast into fire as fuel, or thrown into the river. Our ancients tell us that Tamil survived fire and water in the past, but not any more, he writes. In many places, he ignored discomfort as well as personal disrespect. Had he been defeated by these hardships, he could never have restored Tamilttay’s jewels back to her, he writes (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 640-86). Until the very end of his life, he appears not to have lost his love for these manuscripts.

“My body may be tiring with age, but my mind has still not lost its devotion to these palm leaves,” he observes (Swaminatha Aiyar 1991b: 120).

With the acquisition of the desired manuscripts, the battle had only barely begun. He had to labor hard to read them, struggling over the meanings of archaic words that had long been in disuse, and to understand ancient worldviews quite alien to his Shaiva and Brahmanical upbringing. There were also the challenges of printing, at a time when that technology was still fairly new (Venkatachalapathy 1994a: 274-78). Unlike many later scholars, who would leave the details to the publisher and the press, Swaminathan supervised the entire printing process from start to end, from the selection of the font to the binding of the finished product. Above all, there were financial problems. Publication of these works demanded enormous outlays of money, far in excess of his modest income as a college teacher, and he had to turn to a network of patrons—some reliable, others not so. On more than one occasion, he had to borrow money to keep the printing process going. He also spent many of his waking moments worrying over potential competitors (including fellow devotee  Damodaram Pillai), who might beat him to the punch, and dealing with nasty rumors that were floated about his inabilities and inadequacies. About his troubles and worries, he writes:

“In the land of tenral [தென்றல்] [southern breeze] and sandal, our Tamil reigns, sweet and soft. I have dedicated myself to the auspicious service (tiruppaṇi  [திருப்பணி]) of that glorious goddess Tamil. Thanks to the wondrous grace of that goddess, the waves of trouble of this world do not deluge me in misery” (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 657).

Not surprisingly, when the first copies of his published Cintāmaṇi arrived from the binders, he stacked them reverentially and offered them worship. For, he writes, the text— whether published or unpublished—

“appears to me as the image of a deity. My desire is only to wipe away the dust and clothe it anew so I can see it.... I believe that each part of it is divinity itself” (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 611).

Swaminathan lived his life in the high noon of empire. Yet there are few signs of colonialism, westernization, or modernity in his reminiscences. With touching candor, he confesses to the thrill of excitement he felt as a child when he learned the English alphabet. There must be something magical about it, he notes, for even mere association with it confers so much prestige (Swaminatha Aiyar 1982: 61-62). Frequently, during the course of his travels and research, he would encounter fellow devotees—Vedanayakam Pillai, Damodaram Pillai, and others—who knew English and were obviously men of influence and power. And yet it astounded him that they continued to be enthusiastic about Tamil. Swaminathan was not alone in registering such wonder, and a special affection is accorded in the devotional community to all those who had not let their knowledge of English, or their worldly affluence, get in the way of their love for Tamil. Indeed, in the early years of tamiḻppaṟṟu  [தமிழ்ப்பற்று - devotion to Tamil], there were quite a few “gentlemen scholars” such as J. Nallaswami Pillai and P. V. Manickam Nayakar, who, like Swaminathan, expressed their devotion to Tamil through their scholarship. But they moved in a world that appeared far removed from Swaminathan’s. They had university degrees, were well-placed in the hierarchies of government, were fluent in English, and were materially well-off."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 208 - 212. -- Fair use]


Madras Presidency: Kampagne des Self-Respect Movement (Tamil சுயமரியாதை இயக்கம்), das Kambaramayanam (Tamil கம்பராமாயணம்) und das Periya Puranam (Tamil பெரிய‌ புராண‌ம்) öffentlich zu verbrennen.

"In 1943, when the Self-respect Movement launched a campaign to burn publicly, the Kamba Ramayanam and the Periyapuranam, the Saivite reaction was a muted echo of the late 1920s. Pandithamani Kathiresan Chettiar released a statement condemning the move in strong terms. And when an open debate between the Self-respect leaders and Saivite scholars was organised in early 1943,  C. N. Annadurai and Ezhathu Adigal faced S. Somasundara Bharathi and R. P. Sethu Pillai. While the brunt of the attack was borne by Kamba Ramayanam, the Saivite classic Periyapuranam received only token mention. Moreover, S.S. Bharati and Sethu Pillai defended the classics, not in religious/Saivite terms but more or less on literary and aesthetic grounds. Anna carried the day with his youthful exuberance and novel style of elocution."

[Quelle: A. R. Venkatachalapathy [Tamil ஆ. இரா. வேங்கடாசலபதி): In Those Days There Was No Coffee: Writings in Cultural History,  -- New Delhi : Yoda, 2006. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


தமிழ் உணர்ச்சி மாநாடு - Tamiḻ uṇarcci mānāṭu = Tamil Consciousness Conference

"Although the relative importance of Tamil and Sanskrit in temple worship has varied from sect to sect, the two languages have been an integral part of the region’s institutionalized scriptural Hinduism from the late first millennium c.e. (Cutler 1987:187-94; Peterson 1989: 54-56). Over the centuries, periodic doctrinal and sectarian conflict had erupted around the question of language and liturgy (A. Appadurai 1981: 77-82), but beginning in the 1920s, with neo-Shaivism taking on an increasingly radical stance, the call came for completely excising Sanskrit and its scriptures from Tamilnadu temples and replacing these with Tamil and its scriptures.

Along with this also came the demand, as was voiced in 1943 by the Tamil Unarcci Manatu, the “Tamil Consciousness Conference,” for de-Sanskritizing the names of deities, temples, and temple towns and replacing them with their original or former Tamil names (Ilankumaran 1991: 175).

One enthusiast even urged that throughout Tamilnadu, all temples ought to follow only one uniform Tamil liturgical text and priests should be taught to remember that they are Tamilians, should be assured that conducting worship in Tamil would bring in more remuneration, and should be granted honors if they perform good aruccanai (அருச்சனை) in Tamil."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 138. -- Fair use]

1943 (1942?)

Uraufführung des Schauspiels:

C. N. Annadurai (Tamil சி. என். அண்ணாதுரை - Ci. Eṉ. Aṇṇāturai, 1909 - 1969): சந்திரோதயம் - Cantirōtayam (Chandrodayam)

"Annadurai wrote the script of the play and his friends, who had had little or no previous experience, were the chief actors. Annadurai was no exception, yet he took a leading role in the play. With all these shortcomings when the play was staged at one of the Justice conferences in 1942, not only was it well attended but also it received favourable comments from those experienced in the dramatic field. Emboldened by this success, he staged the play subsequently at other Justice Party and D.K. [Dravidar Kazhagam] conferences and also in all the important towns in the Tamil districts ’Chandrodayam’, despite its success as a stage play, cannot be considered great as literature, even when compared with some of Annadurai’s later works, which are regarded as masterpieces. What he set out to achieve was the employment of a literary genre to popularize some of the reforming ideas advanced by the D.K. in an entertaining and impressive way, and in this he was highly successful. Vanchinatha Sastri, one of the main characters in the play is drawn as a villain and as a representative of what Annadurai considered as Brahmanism. As an old priest in a zamin temple, he wields enormous power with the zamindar and his subjects.

Using this advantageous position he contrives a plot by which he can deprive the zamindar of his wealth and position in society. In contrast to this character is Durairaj, the leader of the local rationalist society, who misses no opportunity to ridicule caste, Vanchinatha Sastri and his young wife’s amorous activities. Durairaj is charged with a fictitious theft, but Vanchinatha Sastri helps him to escape with a stem warning not to enter the zamin estate to meddle with his plans. Vexed with his failure, Durairaj wanders aimlessly and involves himself in a treacherous plot to overthrow the Head of a Saiva religious math, and aids the plotters to succeed in their scheme for a share in their spoils. He returns a rich man, with the pseudonym Mayendran, only to find the zamindar swindled out of his wealth and his only daughter widowed after a marriage to an aged zamindar arranged by Vanchinatha Sastri for money. Thereafter Durairaj addresses himself to exposing the priest’s treachery and villainy to the zemindar. He succeeds in this mission and frees the zamindar from slavery to Brahmanical ideas. To prove his reformation he agrees to give his widowed daughter in re-marriage to one of Durairaj’s friends, who has been in love with her. The hero, Durairaj, himself commits suicide to escape prison for his role in dispossessing the Head of the Saiva math of his wealth and position.

This is an allegorical play in which Tamilnad is portrayed as a rich land where the leader and the people are slaves to the cultural ideas of Brahmans. To liberate them from this domination comes Ramasami Naicker in the person of Durairaj in the play with his message of rationalism. Whether the audience understood this allegorical import or not, they were no doubt made to contemplate and accept the obvious truth that religion as practised and religious institutions as they functioned in society do not have their self-proclaimed sanctity or infallibility, because those who practise religion and run the institutions are mere human beings given to human inperfections. The priest Vanchinatha Sastri and the Head of the Saiva math in the play are purposely painted in the blackest dye so that the illiterate and semi-illiterate masses who witnessed the play could understand that those who practise religion are in no way superior and that religion like other things is but a vocation and a special prerogative of Brahmans in society. This message could not have gone deeper among the common people in a land which had given birth to and nourished for over twelve hundred years the Bhakti movement, which is still a strong force among the Tamils."

[Quelle: E. Sa. Visswanathan: The political career of E. V. Ramasami Naicker : A study in the politics of Tamilnad 1920 - 1949. -- Thesis: Canberra : Australian National University, 1973. -- S. 361ff. -- Online: -- Fair use]


 Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973) in einer Ansprache:

"In a revealing speech of 1944, Ramasami offered the following advice to his fellow Dravidians:

“You may well ask, ‘If we give up Hinduism, what religion can we profess to have?’ Have courage and claim that religion which will not demean you as untouchable and lowly in society. If there is objection to this, you may always say you are Dravidian and that your religion is Dravidianism. If you have problems even with that, say that your religion is humanity”

(Anaimuthu 1974: 446)."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 69. -- Fair use]


Konapattu: Es erscheint:

K. Appadurai (Tamil அப்பாதுரை): தமிழ் வாழ்க! - Tamiḻ vāḻka! (May Tamil flourish). -- Konapattu, 1944

"Thus K. Appadurai refers to the missionary devotees, Caldwell and Pope, as vellait tamilar [வெள்ளைத் தமிழர்] (white Tamilians), and writes:

I wish to declare that all those who show devotion to Tamil ought to be considered tamilar [தமிழர் - Tamile]. It gives me great pleasure to include amongst Tamilians all those who come to the Tamil land and learn and use Tamil and turn into devotees of Tamil.... If asked who are the Tamilians, we could easily say that they are those who reverence Tamiḻttāy [தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil]. If asked who are the friends of Tamilians, they are the speakers of other languages who wish they could have been borne by Tamilttay’s womb.

(K. Appadurai 1944: 11-21)"

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 251f. -- Fair use]


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ் ; Telugu మద్రాస్): Es erscheint:

M. Rajamanikkam (Tamil  ராஜமாணிக்கம், 1907 - 1967): மறைந்த நகரம் அல்லது மொஹெஞ்சோ-தாரோ - Maṟainta nakaram allatu moheñcō-tārō [The Lost City or Mohenjo-Daro : For chilrend]. -- Madras : South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society, 1944

"M. Rajamanikkam (1907-67) similarly introduced Mohenjodaro and its excavated remains, this time to Tamil children, by noting that he wrote the book to arouse their consciousness about “their lost and buried past,” and to make them realize that

“the predominant part of Tamilnadu’s ancient history lies hidden in the earth.”

Ongoing archaeological work was only confirming what Tamil literature had maintained all along, that there had been a Tamil civilization which was lost to the ocean and that Dravidians had lived all over India thousands of years ago:

“Some are attempting to conceal this fact. As devotees of Tamil, you should come forth and help establish the antiquity of your mother tongue, the greatness of your Dravidian civilization. May Mother Tamil offer you her grace.”

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 122. -- Fair use]


Tod von V. Tiruvarangam Pillai (Tamil வ. திருவரங்கம் பிள்ளை - Va. Tiruvaraṅkam Piḷḷai, 1890 - 1944), Gründer (1920) des Shaiva Siddhanta Kazhagam (Tamil சைவ சித்தாந்த கழகம்)

"A less spectacular, but no less heroic, model of patronage is offered by the life of V. Tiruvarangam Pillai, the founder of the Shaiva Siddhanta Kazhagam, perhaps the largest publishing house devoted to printing ancient Tamil literary and religious books from its inception in 1920 to this day. Tiruvarangam’s life, in stark contrast to Pandithurai’s, began in a humble Vellala home in Palayamkottai in Tirunelveli district, where his family ran a general merchandise store. When his father died in 1899, the young Tiruvarangam, who was then only nine years old, went to work in Tuticorin to support his family. When he was seventeen, he sailed to Colombo where he worked for a number of years in various commercial establishments. His entrepreneurial skills must have been forged in this context, for he was able to gather together enough money in 1914 to help finance the first trip to Colombo by Maraimalai Adigal (about whose skills as a speaker and reformer there was much talk). Furthermore, he was also able to put together a handsome purse which he presented to Maraimalai and which enabled the latter to continue with his work in Madras. Over the next few years, Tiruvarangam continued to help Maraimalai’s reform activities by arranging for public lectures, collecting funds, and opening bookstores in Colombo and Madras to help sell the reformer’s books. In 1920, he even launched a monthly journal called Centamilkkalanciyam, primarily for the purpose of publishing Maraimalai’s commentary on the Tiruvacakam (Ilankumaran 1982: 1-30) .

His crowning achievement, however, was the establishment of the Kazhagam in Tirunelveli in 1920, with a branch office opening in Madras in 1921. His biographer tells us that he took the cue from Maraimalai and his circle of scholar friends, who lamented that Tamilians were quick to invest in all kinds of new ventures but none would support the publication of books of knowledge which are the very source of life (Ilankumaran 1982: 30-31). True to the spirit of tamiḻppaṟṟu  [தமிழ்ப்பற்று - devotion to Tamil], its admirers insist that although the Kazhagam is a business venture, it has not let economic reasons override its dedication to the cause of Tamil (Ilankumaran 1991: 183). The Kazhagam’s involvement in Tamil devotional activities over the past few decades has been manifold, including the support of educational institutions as well as of Tamil libraries. Additionally, it has convened numerous public conferences on various aspects of Shaiva and Tamil literature, on the creation of Tamil technical terms, on Tamilnadu history, and the like. In 1937, Tiruvarangam and his associates played a key role in the founding in Tirunelveli of the Tamilp Patukappuk Kalakam [தமிழ் பாதுகாப்புக் கழகம்] (Society for the Protection of Tamil), which published several pamphlets and books promoting the cause of taṉittamiḻ [தனித்தமிழ் - pure Tamil]  and protesting the government’s Hindi policy. In 1923, Tiruvarangam also started the Centamilc Celvi [செந்தமிழ் செல்வி], a journal devoted to promoting the twin causes of Shaivism and Tamil that is still published today.

But over and above all this, Tiruvarangam’s fame in the world of tamilpparru rests on the role that the Kazhagam has played in the field of publishing: under its auspices, almost every major work in Tamil and Shaiva literature, as well as several minor and hitherto unknown ones, has been printed and made available to the public. Indeed, the image of Tiruvarangam that is remembered most fondly by fellow devotees is that of a man whose voluminous coat pockets were ever stuffed with old manuscripts and galley proofs. In 1980, V. S. Manickam, then vice-chancellor of Madurai Kamaraj University, noted that if Tiruvarangam had not founded the Kazhagam, none of the following would have found their way into print: Tamil school textbooks, the Cankam poems, the Tolkāppiyam, M. Varadarajan’s sparkling commentary on the Tirukkural, dictionaries and encyclopedias, and the Centamilc Celvi. Consequently,

“our Tamiḻttāy [Tamil தமிழ்த்தாய் = Mutter Tamil], too, would have wandered around like a weakling able to carry only one child. [But, because of the Kazhagam], our Tamilttay has acquired several heads and arms, her blood has been enriched with knowledge, and her nerves and sinews have been strengthened with books. She now has the capacity to go everywhere in all directions; even shouldering the burden of fifty million of her children, she flourishes happily” (quoted in Ilankumaran 1982: 2).""

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 222ff. -- Fair use]


Chidambaram (Tamil சிதம்பரம்): Varnaashrama Maanadu (Varnashrama Meeting) der Kasten-Hindus. Starke Gegenbewegung von Seiten der Anhänger von Periyar E. V. Ramasamy (Tamil ஈ. வெ. இராமசாமி, 1879 - 1973)

M._Karunanidhi (Tamil மு. கருணாநிதி, 1924 - 2018) in Tamil dagegen:

"In our glorious state
Which has sung the song of many victories
Without a bit of shame
Some selfish brethren come together
And even if they turn somersaults in a vain effort
To set down the roots of varnam (caste)
Protect your self-respect
Upon pain of death, brave Tamizhaa!
Down with Varnaashramam!"

[Quelle: Sandhya Ravishankar (Tamil சந்தியா ரவிசங்கர்): Karunanidhi : A life in politics. -- HarperCollins, 2019. -- Kindle ed. -- Fair use]


Es erscheint das Tamil Gedicht:

Bharathidasan (Tamil பாரதிதாசன், 1891 - 1964): தமிழ்இயக்கம் - Tamiḻiyakkam  (The resurgence of Tamil). -- Online: Thamizh Iyakkam - Bharathidasan.pdf (


Madras (Tamil மதராஸ்): Es erscheint:

N. S. Kandiah Pillai: நமது நாடு - Namatu nāṭu [Our nation]. -- Madras : South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society, 1945

"Finally, borrowing here from a popular strategy of nineteenth- and twentieth-century diffusionism, some devotees even used maps to show the dispersal of the original Tamil population out of Kumarinatu and their re-settlement in different parts of the world. The earliest of such maps that I have seen is entitled “Descendants of Tamilians” (1943) and shows those parts of the globe that we today identify as the Middle East, northeast Africa, the Mediterranean, and southern Europe. Its author, Kandiah Pillai, illustrates the map with an extensive discussion of such “descendants” as Sumerians, Egyptians, Elamites, Babylonians, Cretans, ancient Britons, Phoenicians, Assyrians, Hebrews, Arabs, and Chinese, among others.147 A few years later, in a book, intended for young children, Kandiah Pillai included a similar map that used arrows to show the migration of the inhabitants of “Kumarinatu” to the Indus Valley, Sumeria, Phoenicia, Egypt, even England and elsewhere."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: The lost land of Lemuria : Fabulous geographies, catastrophic histories. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 2004. -- 334 S. : Ill. -- S. 126. -- Fair use]


Tod von Frau Nilambikai (Tamil திருவரங்க நீலாம்பிகை - Tiruvaraṅka nīlāmpikai, 1903 - 1945)

"Nilambikai has been described in the biography written by her brother as a woman who came into this world solely for the purpose of serving Tamil:

“she embodies tamiḻppaṟṟu  [தமிழ்ப்பற்று - devotion to Tamil]; her life is the life of Tamil; she cannot be pried apart from Tamil” (M. Tirunavukarasu 1945: 50).

Born in 1903, Nilambikai’s life and future as a Tamil devotee was over-determined. The favorite daughter of Maraimalai Adigal, she was raised on the shoulders and laps of other well-known devotees such as Arasan Shanmugan (1868-1915) and Pandithurai Thevar (1867-1911), who were her father’s friends and patrons. Her father appears to have taken great pride in her love for Tamil, even making her memorize, when she was thirteen, one of his essays on the duties of motherhood, which she publicly recited at a scholarly meeting in Madras. So impressed was he with his young daughter, her brother tells us, that Maraimalai Adigal declared passionately one day,

“Nila’s face resembles that of Shelley and Shakespeare and other great savants” (M. Tirunavukarasu 1945: 8-12).

In the devotional community, Nilambikai occupies a special niche for her role in spurring her famous father into launching his pure Tamil movement in 1916. Her brother recalls that Nilambikai bestowed pure Tamil names upon her siblings, and would use only those; she would speak and write as far as possible in pure Tamil; and she would correct anyone who used a foreign word when speaking in Tamil (M. Tirunavukarasu 1945: 14-15). Soon after, in 1918, when she turned sixteen, Nilambikai met the twenty-eight-year-old Tiruvarangam Pillai (1890-1944), who a few years later was to set up the famous Shaiva Siddhanta Kazhagam. Her brother remembers that his entire family had come to see Tiruvarangam as a godlike figure, their father’s savior and patron. It is perhaps not surprising that young Nilambikai fell in love with him, although she was not allowed to marry him for almost ten years (M. Tirunavukarasu 1945: 21-35).

Intertwined though her life may have been with those of these famous devotees, Nilambikai nevertheless strived to serve Tamil on her own as well. By the time she was in her early twenties, she had published numerous essays on the virtues of taṉittamiḻ [தனித்தமிழ் - pure Tamil] in the face of considerable opposition to the pure Tamil movement (Nilambikai i960). She followed this up in 1937 with a dictionary, the first of its kind, which demonstrated the existence of pure Tamil equivalents for seven thousand Sanskrit words that had swamped Tamil (Nilambikai 1952). She also taught Tamil in girls’ schools; spoke at various Shaiva conferences; and wrote extensively on the revival of Tamil, the spread of Shaivism, and the improvement of women. By all accounts, she was alarmed by what she saw as an absence of interest in Tamil among its female speakers, a concern that she voiced especially strongly in her inaugural address to the Tamilnadu Women’s Conference summoned in November 1938 to register Tamil women’s protest against Hindi. Of course, Nilambikai’s vision for how women should help their language fell within the parameters of middle-class motherhood. They should establish tanittamil [pure Tamil] women’s colleges and bookstores, encourage widow education, and become Tamil teachers. But such public services should never compromise their primary function as educated homemakers who raised their children to be well-read, disciplined, and pure Tamil speakers (Nilambikai n.d.). She wrote and spoke ardently on such matters in spite of poor health, and in spite of having to take care of her own eight children. At least by her brother’s account, she took great pride in her own motherhood, raising her children to be devout Shaivites and Tamil speakers (M. Tirunavukarasu 1945: 38-43). But it is hard to deny that the birth of eleven children over a period of about fifteen years must have taken its toll on her health, and she was only forty-three when she died in 1945, a year after her beloved husband and fellow devotee had passed on."

[Quelle: Sumathi Ramaswamy [சுமதி ராமஸ்வாமி]: Passions of tongue : Language devotion in Tamil India 1891 - 1970. -- Berkeley : Univ. of California Pr., 1997. -- S. 185ff. -- Fair use]


Aufruf an alle Vollzeit-Mitarbeiter des Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) (Tamil: திராவிடர் கழகம் -- Dravidian Federation) sich der Dravidan Freedom Force (Blackshirts Movement) anzuschließen. Einer der ersten ist M._Karunanidhi (Tamil மு. கருணாநிதி, 1924 - 2018)

"In the 1940s, Dravidian movement founder EV Ramasamy was invited for a music function. The artist who was playing the Nadaswaram was sweating profusely and was wiping his face often with a towel that he had kept by his side. After some time, the Nadaswaram player got sick of picking the towel and placed it on his shoulder for pure convenience. Now, the sponsor of the show, an upper caste zamindar of the area, was offended by this defiant act of the lower caste nadaswaram artist. He openly and loudly ordered the musician to remove the towel from his shoulder.

EV Ramasamy], a social reformer, condemned the zamindar's attitude and walked away. The next day on, Ramasamy requested all Dravidar Kazhagam members to wear a thundu (towel) in protest against the upper caste attire of angavasthram (a long ornamental towel).

"In those days, Periyar (EVR) wanted to uproot caste sentiments and superstitions prevalent in Tamil society. So, he chose the towel and to fight superstition, he chose the black shirt. The cadres of the Dravidian movement have followed it with zeal,"

MDMK [Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam] propaganda secretary Mallai Sathya told India Today. Once CN Annadurai, for some reason, came to a meeting in a plain shirt instead of black.

Periyar said Annadurai cannot get up on the stage for not wearing black. And to boot, it was Karunanidhi who signed on first when Periyar started the Black Shirt Brigade in 1945. And to this day, he boasts of the fact in meetings. But when Periyar declared August 15, 1947 [Unabhängigkeit], as a black day and asked the cadres to wear black shirts, Annadurai and his clique in the DK [Dravidar Kazhagam] refused.

When the DK split leading to the formation of the DMK [
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam], they formed a custom of wearing black only on protest marches.

"When Karunanidhi returned to wearing black shirts, our leader Veeramani